Warhol's Prince image: Sotomayor and Kagan split over fair use

Sotomayor's Supreme Court majority and Kagan's dissent disagree over the first fair-use factor for the Foundation's 2016 magazine license of Orange Prince. Their arguments concern that commercial use, rather than every use of Warhol's artwork.

Case period:

Published by The Dispute Index editorial teamPublished Updated

Lynn GoldsmithAndy Warhol Foundation for the Visual ArtsSupreme Court of the United States

Overview

This case examines the Foundation's first-factor fair-use defense for its 2016 commercial Orange Prince magazine license.

The May 18, 2023 decision concerns a particular license to Conde Nast, not every creation, display or sale of the Prince Series. The majority emphasizes the similar commercial magazine purpose. Kagan, joined by Chief Justice John Roberts, argues that the transformation of Goldsmith's photograph should carry greater weight under the first factor.

The Court was deciding that factor, not issuing a rule that all borrowing in art infringes. Neil Gorsuch's concurrence, joined by Ketanji Brown Jackson, also emphasizes the particular use under review.

Timeline

1 timeline entry on this page. Dates: May 18, 2023

  1. May 2023

    1. The Supreme Court rules on the magazine license's first fair-use factor

      The Court rules 7-2 against the Foundation on that factor for the particular commercial license.

      [01]Supreme Court of the United States

      The Court considers the first fair-use factor for the Foundation's 2016 commercial magazine license, rather than every use of the Prince Series.

      Supreme Court opinions in Andy Warhol Foundation v. Goldsmith · Supreme Court of the United StatesMajority pages 12-38; Kagan dissent; Gorsuch concurrence

Response record

Responses

Choose one response filter, or select All responses to see the full record.

No responses match these filters.

Clear response filters

Sources

(1)

Original text

Supreme Court opinions in Andy Warhol Foundation v. Goldsmith

Supreme Court opinions in Andy Warhol Foundation v. Goldsmith (opens in a new tab) · Supreme Court of the United StatesMajority pages 12-38; Kagan dissent; Gorsuch concurrence
Read source (opens in a new tab)

Relevant passage: Majority pages 12-38; Kagan dissent; Gorsuch concurrence

About this source

The Court considers the first fair-use factor for the Foundation's 2016 commercial magazine license, rather than every use of the Prince Series.

Published
Accessed
Archived copy (opens in a new tab)

Case updates

Want the next important update?

Follow this case and get an email when an important development changes the record.

Updated in the last few days.

Important updates only. Free. Confirm your email to start. Unsubscribe anytime. How we handle your email.

The newsletter

Follow disputes like this one.

New cases and significant updates to the record, in your inbox. Free.

You’ll confirm your subscription on Substack.

Share or embed this case

The embed keeps its attribution link to The Dispute Index. Credit the image to The Dispute Index and link to the case page.

Cite this record

Publisher
The Dispute Index
Title
Warhol's Prince image: Sotomayor and Kagan split over fair use
First published
Last updated
Permalink
https://disputeindex.com/cases/warhol-goldsmith-orange-prince-magazine-license-fair-use

The Dispute Index. "Warhol's Prince image: Sotomayor and Kagan split over fair use". First published: 2026-10-25. Last updated: 2026-10-25. https://disputeindex.com/cases/warhol-goldsmith-orange-prince-magazine-license-fair-use