Online Copyright Registration in India

Protect your creative work
Books, Songs, film, websites, Software, painting, fashion Design etc
Call now: 09891244487

Ask Our legal Experts, on issues related to Divorce

File Mutual Consent divorce right away

Call at ph no: 9650499965
  Search On:Laws in IndiaLawyers Search

To Appeal before CIC - Central Information Commission
For Filing and Hearing contact: Choudhury's law Office
Ph no: 8851046564

Author Topic: Cariou vs. Prince | meaning of fair use  (Read 1704 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline advjaya

  • Sr. Legal Expert
  • ****
  • Posts: 114
  • Karma: +4/-5
  • Welcome to legal Service India - law forum for free legal Information
    • View Profile
Cariou vs. Prince | meaning of fair use
« on: August 29, 2013, 01:51:15 AM »
Case Background
Richard Prince is a well known appropriation artist — one who transforms the work of others to create new meaning in his own work. For an exhibition in the Gagosian Gallery, Prince appropriated 41 images from a photography book by French photographer Patrick Cariou, claiming fair use that he created new meaning out of the photographs. Cariou argued that it wasn’t fair use, but copyright infringement.

A judge ruled in favor for Cariou in 2011, claiming the changes made to Cariou’s photographs weren’t significant enough to constitute a change in meaning — fair use. However, the case is currently in appeal and the final decision has not yet been reached.

The initial ruling in this case in favor of Cariou has created huge divisions in the artistic community. It brings up questions about artistic intent and the subjectivity of art, asking “who was this judge to determine whether or not the appropriated artwork had enough meaning to be considered fair use” when the art could be interpreted differently by each person who viewed it. The jury is still out on this one.

Imitation vs. inspiration: don’t be a designer who creates work too close to that of another. You have to make sure you are creating something original and not derivative.

Update 4/25/2013
Not two weeks after this article was published, the original decision in this case was overturned and the judge ruled in favor of Prince, claiming that Prince’s work transformed the work in the way that it was aesthetically different, and thus acceptable under the argument of fair use.
Madras High Court Advocate

Free legal Advice - lawyers Forum


File a Consumer Complaint
Property verification
Call: 9873628941

Lawyers in India - Listed city wise Mumbai
lawyers in London
lawyers in Birmingham
lawyers in Toronto
lawyers in Sydney

lawyers in Milan

Delhi - New Delhi
lawyers in New York
los Angeles
lawyers in Dhaka
lawyers in Dubai

Copyright Registration
Ph no: 9891244487

For Mutual consent Divorce in Delhi
-Ph no: 9650499965

Home | Bare Acts | Law Forms | Supreme Court Judgments | Legal Advice | Lawyers | Submit article | Sitemap | Contact Us

legal Service is Copyrighted under the Registrar of Copyright Act ( Govt of India) © 2000-2018
Get Free legal Advice here from top notch lawyers in India