杏十八新茶分享

 

Wilson v. New Palace Casino, LLC

Summarized by:

  • Court: Intellectual Property Archives
  • Area(s) of Law: Copyright
  • Date Filed: 03-07-2013
  • Case #: 1:11cv447-HSO-JNR
  • Judge(s)/Court Below: Ozerden

Protection of works of art under VARA does not extend vicariously to derivative works.


Opinion (Ozerden): Marty Wilson created the painting titled 芒€œBlue Water Blitz.芒€ New Palace Casino bought the original painting. While the facts concerning a purported licensing agreement were in dispute, Wilson claimed that the wahoo fish on New Palace芒€™s merchandise infringed his depiction of a wahoo fish in 芒€œBlue Water Blitz芒€ under the Visual Artists Rights Act (VARA). However, Wilson admitted he used his wahoo fish in many other works, some in digital format on the Internet; and Wilson believed New Palace copied the digital image from the Internet. On these facts, the Court found that no 芒€œwork of visual art芒€ was copied, because the possible source images that could have been copied were excluded from the subcategory of 芒€œwork of visual art.芒€ The Court added that had a 芒€œwork of visual art芒€ been copied, there still would not have been a violation because New Palace芒€™s alleged uses of the image 芒€œinvolved merchandising or qualified as advertising or promotional materials.芒€ The Court DISMISSED Wilson芒€™s claims for attribution and integrity.

Advanced Search


Back to Top