Two references concerned copyright claims involving furniture and the test for infringement of applied art.
Context photograph: The Rolls Building, where the Business and Property Courts sit in London today. Muhammad Karns · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Resized and cropped for display
Eric McNatt challenged the reuse of his portrait of Kim Gordon in Richard Prince’s New Portraits series.
Context photograph: The Rolls Building, where the Business and Property Courts sit in London today. Muhammad Karns · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Resized and cropped for display
Brompton claimed copyright in the shape of a folding bicycle previously covered by a patent.
Context photograph: The Rolls Building, where the Business and Property Courts sit in London today. Muhammad Karns · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Resized and cropped for display
A film festival website used Russell Brammer’s photograph of a Washington neighborhood to illustrate a guide.
Context photograph: The original Statue of Liberty in New York, the model for the Las Vegas replica at issue. William Warby · CC BY 2.0 · Resized and cropped for display
Reproductions of designer furniture were marketed to German customers and delivered from Italy.
Context photograph: Westminster Bridge and a red bus, subjects of the disputed composition. Arpingstone · Public domain · Resized and cropped for display
An artist and a museum disagreed about the handling and proposed presentation of a large unfinished installation.
Context photograph: Law Courts Building in Sydney, a seat of the Federal Court of Australia. JustARandomEditor123 · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Resized and cropped for display
A sculptor objected to changes to a Boston park where his site-specific work was installed.
Context photograph: Law Courts Building in Sydney, a seat of the Federal Court of Australia. JustARandomEditor123 · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Resized and cropped for display
A Grateful Dead biography reproduced reduced images of seven concert posters and tickets.
Context photograph: St. Louis Cathedral, New Orleans, the subject of both photographs in the dispute. 88maddie.taylor · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Resized and cropped for display
Two photographers depicted St. Louis Cathedral from the same gate in misty conditions.
Context photograph: Vigyan Bhavan, the venue for Amar Nath Sehgal’s mural in New Delhi. Sumita Roy Dutta · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Resized and cropped for display
An artist challenged the appearance of towers associated with a Los Angeles building in a film.
Context photograph: Middlesex Guildhall, home of the UK Supreme Court, which assumed the House of Lords’ judicial role in 2009. Tom Morris · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Resized and cropped for display
A Wikimedia contributor uploaded scans of museum photographs and photographs he took at the museum. The paintings themselves were in the public domain.
An inscription at the Korean War Veterans Memorial, the site of the sculpture at issue. Dontkickthebaby · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Resized and cropped for display
A pupil used a photograph of Córdoba in a school project that was posted on the school website. The image had previously been published on another website with the photographer’s permission.
Photographer Franck Davidovici challenged Jeff Koons’s sculpture Fait d’hiver, which reproduced elements of his fashion advertisement. The dispute also concerned display and reproduction in exhibition publications.
A Swedish online database displayed photographs of artworks permanently installed in public places. The question was whether the public-place exception covered online publication by the database operator.
Richard Prince used Patrick Cariou’s photographs in works from the Canal Zone series. The appeal considered whether the resulting works qualified as fair use.
Lucasfilm challenged the making and sale of replica Stormtrooper helmets, raising questions about sculpture, functional props and cross-border enforcement.
Claude Robinson alleged that an animated television series copied expressive elements of the project he had developed, including character and setting elements.
An illustrator challenged the use of an apple drawing on a website, alleging infringement of reproduction, public transmission, attribution and integrity rights.
A photographer challenged newspaper uses of a portrait. The reference concerned the originality of portrait photography and exceptions relevant to the press.