Recent decisions suggest courts are losing patience with those who bring dubious copyright infringement claims as part of their business models.
Rachel Dolezal, the woman accused of misrepresenting her racial background, has filed a new infringement lawsuit against CBS Interactive. Is she weaponizing copyright?
"Saturday Night Live's" literal beat down of "The Muppet Show" so closely resembled the classic Jim Henson characters that some viewers thought the Muppets had really made an appearance on the show. Did SNL go too far?
The Andy Warhol Foundation (AWF) is asking the Second Circuit to reconsider its recent fair use ruling over Warhol's “Prince Series,” arguing that the decision “threatens to render unlawful many of the most historically significant artistic works of the last half-century.”
The Supreme Court's long-awaited decision finds that Google's copying of Oracle's Java API was fair use. Should creators of more traditional content be concerned?
In a retreat from its Cariou decision, the Second Circuit finds that Andy Warhol's use of a Lynn Goldsmith photo of the pop icon Prince isn't transformative. But lots of questions remain.
Copyright professor Jack Lerner and his law students read every fair use case from the past two years so you don't have to. Here are some of the highlights.
With Dr. Seuss Enterprises deciding to no longer publish six books containing racially insensitive content, would it be fair use for others to do so?
In a new case, a photographer claims that celebrity tattoo artist Kat Von D infringed his copyright in a iconic photo of Miles Davis by tattooing the same image onto a client's body.
The Ninth Circuit's fair use ruling is an early Christmas present for copyright owners and a lump of coal for creators of unauthorized mash-ups that don't ridicule the original works.