DIRS.INFO The most relevant business & tech news

☆ Richard Ekstract, Magazine Publisher With Link to Warhol, Dies at 92
▼ + stars: | 2023-08-30 | by ( Penelope Green | More About Penelope Green | ) www.nytimes.com time to read: +1 min

With Warhol's permission, Mr. Ekstract took them to a commercial printer, who made a second set of self-portraits, following Warhol’s directions given over the phone. As part of the deal, one of the portraits would appear in Mr. Ekstract’s new magazine, Tape Recording. To celebrate the magazine’s debut, Mr. Ekstract, with characteristic flair, threw a party on abandoned rail tracks underneath the Waldorf Astoria hotel. Despite ample documentation about its origins, when Mr. Simon-Whelan asked to have the work authenticated by the Warhol Foundation, his request was denied multiple times. He sued, and in 2010, after the foundation had spent $7 million in legal fees, Mr. Simon-Whelan gave up, having run out of money to continue.

Persons: Warhol, Edie Sedgwick, Hoberman, Ekstract, Joe Simon, Whelan, Simon Organizations: New York Times, Warhol Foundation

☆ Chanel’s Unexpected CEO Is Reinventing the Company
▼ + stars: | 2023-08-27 | by ( Elisa Lipsky-Karasz | Photography Jody Rogac For Wsj. Magazine | ) www.wsj.com time to read: 1 min

Chanel’s Unexpected CEO Is Reinventing the Company When it came time to hire a new CEO, the luxury fashion house made a surprisingly bold choice in Leena Nair“If somebody told me I would have the chance to do what I’m doing today, I would not have believed them,” Nair says of taking the CEO role at Chanel. Andy Warhol, ‘Chanel,’ 1985, from the Ads series, acrylic and silkscreen ink on canvas, 22 x 22 inches, © The Andy Warhol Foundation for the Visual Arts / Artists Rights Society (ARS), New York / Ronald Feldman Gallery, New York (6)

Persons: Leena Nair, ” Nair, Chanel, Andy Warhol, ‘ Chanel, Ronald Feldman Organizations: Andy Warhol Foundation, Visual Arts, Artists Rights Society Locations: New York

☆ Opinion | Andy Warhol and ‘Fair Use’ in Art
▼ + stars: | 2023-06-27 | by ( ) www.nytimes.com time to read: +1 min

To the Editor:In “The Supreme Court Is Wrong About Andy Warhol” (Opinion guest essay, June 10), Richard Meyer gets to the truth about the artist in the last sentence: “His art, like all good art, was not created to abide by the law.”But we all live under law, including copyright law. According to Professor Meyer, “Had [Warhol] known about fair use, the artist likely would have been little concerned with legal repercussions.” Well, Warhol and his lawyers most likely knew the elements of the “fair use” defense because while they were not codified until 1976, those principles date back to Judge Joseph Story’s historic 1841 opinion in Folsom v. Marsh. Warhol may be a “towering figure in modern art,” as Justice Elena Kagan wrote in her dissent last month in Warhol Foundation v. Goldsmith, but the court, in a 7-to-2 opinion written by Justice Sonia Sotomayor, fairly concluded that the work of the photographer Lynn Goldsmith was entitled to copyright protection “even against famous artists.”Keith DanishLeonia, N.J. The writer is a retired attorney who specialized in intellectual property law.

Persons: Andy Warhol ”, Richard Meyer, Meyer, “, Warhol, Joseph Story’s, . Marsh, Elena Kagan, Goldsmith, Sonia Sotomayor, Lynn Goldsmith, ” Keith Danish Leonia Organizations: Warhol Foundation Locations: Folsom, ., N.J

☆ In pointed dissent, Justice Kagan accuses fellow liberal Justice Sotomayor of hypocrisy in Warhol decision, says the court is 'trying too hard' and anti-artist ruling will 'stifle creativity' and 'mak
▼ + stars: | 2023-05-21 | by ( Katherine Tangalakis-Lippert | ) www.businessinsider.com time to read: +5 min

In her dissent against the 7-2 majority, Justice Kagan accused her colleagues of hypocrisy. Lynn Goldsmith's photograph of Prince; Andy Warhol's silkscreen print of Prince, featured on the cover of a Condé Nast magazine. Quoting the 1965 film "The Sound of Music," Kagan wrote: "'Nothing comes from nothing,' the dissent observes, 'nothing ever could.' "The majority claims not to be embarrassed by this embarrassing fact because the specific reference was to his Soup Cans, rather than his celebrity images," Kagan wrote. "It will stifle creativity of every sort," Kagan wrote.

☆ Ruling Against Warhol Shouldn’t Hurt Artists. But It Might.
▼ + stars: | 2023-05-19 | by ( Blake Gopnik | ) www.nytimes.com time to read: +1 min

It turned out that what the majority actually had problems with — what the decision was mostly about — was the Warhol Foundation’s failure to pay Goldsmith a licensing fee in 2016. It looked like the court had sidestepped the larger issue of whether Warhol should have used her image at all. Or that’s what this new ruling would let some artists and their lawyers argue. At the very least, the ruling won’t send museums rushing to consign the appropriations they own to the dark depths of the vaults, as a more sweeping ruling against Warhol might have done. So long as appropriation artists aren’t selling licenses for their creations to be reproduced — for instance, in a popular magazine — the Supreme Court’s new decision should not affect them.

☆ Supreme Court rules against Andy Warhol Foundation in copyright case over Prince photo
▼ + stars: | 2023-05-18 | by ( Dan Mangan | ) www.cnbc.com time to read: +1 min

The Supreme Court on Thursday ruled against the Andy Warhol Foundation in a copyright dispute over the use of a celebrity photographer's image of the musician Prince for artwork created by Warhol. Goldsmith had sued the Warhol Foundation for copyright infringement over its licensing of an image called "Orange Prince" to Conde Naste, the parent company of Vanity Fair magazine, in 2016. Orange Prince is one of 16 Warhol silkscreens based on her photo, which Goldsmith only became aware of in 2016. Although a federal district court rule in the Warhol Foundation's favor, that ruling was overturned by the U.S. 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals. "Lynn Goldsmith's original works, like those of other photographers, are entitled to copyright protection, even against famous artists," the court said in the majority opinion. "

The justices upheld a lower court's ruling that Warhol's works based on Goldsmith's 1981 photo were not immune from her copyright infringement lawsuit. Warhol, who died in 1987, was a foremost participant in the pop art movement that germinated in the 1950s. At issue in the litigation involving Goldsmith was Warhol's "Orange Prince" series. She countersued the Andy Warhol Foundation in 2017 after it asked a court to find that the works did not violate her copyright. Under that standard, the circuit court said Warhol's paintings were closer to adapting Goldsmith's photo in a different medium than transforming it.

☆ Andy Warhol’s Colossal ‘Crash’ Sells for $85.4 Million at Sotheby’s
▼ + stars: | 2022-11-16 | by ( Kelly Crow | ) www.wsj.com time to read: 1 min

Photo: 2022 The Andy Warhol Foundation for the Visual Arts, Inc./Licensed by Artists Rights Society (ARS), New York/Courtesy of Sotheby’sWhen Andy Warhol’s colossal view of a car accident first came at auction in 1987, the silk-screen sold for $660,000. On Wednesday, bidders got another chance at it—and the work resold at Sotheby’s for $85.4 million. The auction house had said it expected the piece to sell for around $80 million.

☆ ‘Chinese chorizo’ honors fusion of two cultures in Arizona
▼ + stars: | 2022-10-21 | by ( Associated Press | ) www.nbcnews.com time to read: +7 min

It’s a history that older Tucson Chinese residents say they have spent years trying to make more visible. To promote the endeavor, she organized the inaugural Tucson Chinese Chorizo Festival. The 15,000-square-foot Tucson Chinese Cultural Center is a bustling hub that’s part community center and part museum, and serves at least 5,000. On the walls are display boards with mini-profiles of long-gone Chinese grocery stores. The center also has a YouTube channel that includes a 2014 video on Chinese chorizo.

☆ Andy Warhol’s Image of Prince Comes Before Supreme Court
▼ + stars: | 2022-10-12 | by ( Jess Bravin | ) www.wsj.com time to read: +1 min

Pop artist Andy Warhol, pictured in 1976, created the Prince Series as among his last works of art before he died in 1987. WASHINGTON—A case involving two of the 20th century’s most famous visual and musical artists comes before the Supreme Court Wednesday, in a copyright dispute pitting a celebrity photographer against the Andy Warhol Foundation for Visual Arts over a photo she shot of Prince that Warhol used as the basis for a series of silk-screen prints. Compared with other forms of intellectual property, copyrights last a long time—for works produced since 1978, generally for 70 years after the author’s death. But copyrights confer weaker protections than patents, for other parties are entitled to make “fair use” of copyright material to create new works of their own. Copyright cases typically turn on whether a subsequent work was transformative or merely duplicative of earlier material.

☆ Andy Warhol’s portraits of Prince get their 15 minutes of fame in Supreme Court copyright showdown
▼ + stars: | 2022-10-12 | by ( Lawrence Hurley | Lawrence Hurley Covers The Supreme Court For Nbc News Digital. | ) www.nbcnews.com time to read: +5 min

The original Lynn Goldsmith photograph of Prince and Andy Warhol's portrait of the musician. Warhol himself had died in 1987, and the relevant works and copyright to them are now held by the Andy Warhol Foundation, which permitted Vanity Fair to use the image in 2016. The following year the issue ended up in court, with Goldsmith and the foundation suing each other to determine whether Warhol’s image constituted fair use. Images from Andy Warhol's series on the musician Prince. It must, “at a bare minimum, comprise something more than the imposition of another artist’s style on the primary work,” the court added.

☆ Justice Clarence Thomas confesses he's a Prince fan during a spirited debate over Andy Warhol's artwork and copyright law
▼ + stars: | 2022-10-12 | by ( Oma Seddiq | ) www.businessinsider.com time to read: +6 min

The Supreme Court heard a case involving pop artist Andy Warhol's iconic silkscreen prints of musician Prince. At issue is whether Warhol violated copyright law by relying on a photographer's image of Prince for his art. The Andy Warhol Foundation has asked the Supreme Court to overturn that ruling. "If you called Andy Warhol as a witness, what would he say?" "And this is a work of art sending a message about modern society," he said of Warhol's.

A man examines "Self-Portrait" by Andy Warhol during a media preview at Christie's auction house in New York, October 31, 2014. She countersued Warhol's estate for copyright infringement in 2017 after it asked a Manhattan federal court to rule that his works did not violate her rights. Copyright law sometimes allows for the fair use of copyrighted works without the creator's permission. A federal judge found Warhol's works were protected by the fair use doctrine, having transformed the "vulnerable" musician depicted in Goldsmith's work into an "iconic, larger-than-life figure." Documentary filmmakers, fan fiction writers and the estates of other major figures in the pop art movement have come out in support of Warhol.

The case centers on how courts decide when an artist makes "fair use" of another's work under copyright law. The Supreme Court will hear arguments in the estate's appeal of a lower court's decision favoring Goldsmith. The Supreme Court's eventual decision could have broad or narrow implications for fair use depending on the ruling, Tushnet said. The Warhol estate told the Supreme Court the 2nd Circuit's decision "casts a cloud of legal uncertainty over an entire genre of visual art, including canonical works by Andy Warhol and countless other artists." Goldsmith's lawyers told the Supreme Court that a ruling favoring the foundation would "transform copyright law into all copying, no right."

Search resuls for: "Warhol Foundation"

14 mentions found