The Latest Breaking News from Andy Warhol

The Supreme Court has ruled in favor of the photographer whose photo of Prince was used by Warhol without consent

From a dummy-driven Tesla, to a giant disco ball, to U.S. presidents' hair, here are some of the weirdest things humans have put into space.

The Supreme Court has made it more difficult to quote from existing imagery, music and text, and harder to critique society by borrowing and amplifying others’ works.

The Supreme Court has sided with individual artists — but against art itself. In a fascinating copyright decision that transcended ideological lines, the court held that Andy Warhol’s distinctive reworking of a photograph of Prince did not count as fair use, thus requiring the Andy Warhol Foundation to compensate the…

Whether it’s a challenging Joaquin Phoenix odyssey, or some sumptuous instrumentals from Stevens, our critics have you covered for the next seven days

The case could have long-term implications for how broadly fair use can be applied.

In its 7-2 ruling Thursday, the Supreme Court said the late artist infringed on a photographer's copyright when he created a series of works based on an image of the pop star Prince.

Justice Elena Kagan argued the ruling would ‘stifle creativity of every sort’

WASHINGTON — Andy Warhol's posters of Prince, some shaded purple and others orange, may have been works of art, but they infringed the copyright of the photographer who captured the original image of the musician, the Supreme Court ruled Thursday.

Washington (AFP) - An Andy Warhol print of the late pop star Prince violated the copyright of the photographer who took the original image, the US Supreme Court said Thursday, in a ruling with important implications for the art market.

That's today's dissent in Andy Warhol Foundation for the Visual Arts, Inc. v. Goldsmith, written by Justice Kagan and joined by Chief Justice Roberts (see pdf pp. 81-83). But I read the U.S. Reports only for the articles. Note that at least one lower court decision, Cariou v. Prince [not…