It's a derivative work.
Is it legal, as a transformative use? Probably not. Andy Warhol's estate just lost a fair use case in the U.S. Supreme Court.
Is it legal, as a transformative use? Probably not. Andy Warhol's estate just lost a fair use case in the U.S. Supreme Court.
https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2023/may/18/andy-wa...
Warhol copied a portrait. Totally different issue.
"The supreme court [lol @ Anti-American Grauniad] focused on the specific use that allegedly infringed Goldsmith’s copyright – a license of Warhol’s work to Condé Nast – and said it was not transformative because it served the same commercial purpose as Goldsmith’s photo: to depict Prince in a magazine."
It is nonsense to claim the Guardian is anti American because their style guide eschews capitalisation. They also refer to the “UK supreme court” and to “the king” without excess capitalisation.