Art Dirt: Is the Supreme Court’s Andy Warhol Ruling Bad for Artists?

A side-by-side comparison of “Orange Prince” by Andy Warhol and a photograph of Prince by Lynn Goldsmith.

Leslie Moody Castro and Brandon Zech discuss a recent decision by the Supreme Court, which ruled against The Andy Warhol Foundation for the Visual Arts.

Forget about separating the art from the artist. Instead, can you separate the art from its intent?

To play the podcast, click on the orange play button below. You can also find Glasstire on Apple Podcasts and on Spotify.

If you enjoy Glasstire and would like to support our work, please consider donating. As a nonprofit, all of the money we receive goes back into our coverage of Texas art. You can make a one-time donation or become a sustaining, monthly donor here.

Related Readings:
—Glasstire: Supreme Court Rules Against Andy Warhol Foundation in Copyright Case; Texas Artists Respond
—Supreme Court Ruling: ANDY WARHOL FOUNDATION FOR THE VISUAL ARTS, INC. v. GOLDSMITH ET AL.
—Glasstire: Art Dirt: Jeff Koons’ Moonshot + Warhol’s Fair Use Case Goes to the Supreme Court
—NYT: Ruling Against Warhol Shouldn’t Hurt Artists. But It Might.
—NYT: Supreme Court Rules Against Andy Warhol in Copyright Case
—NPR: Supreme Court sides against Andy Warhol Foundation in copyright infringement case
—Artnet News: In a Landmark Ruling Against the Andy Warhol Foundation, the Supreme Court Has Sided With Photographer Lynn Goldsmith
—ARTnews: US Supreme Court Rules Against Warhol Foundation in Closely Watched Copyright Case
—The New Yorker: The Supreme Court’s Self-Conscious Take on Andy Warhol
—The New Yorker: How Warhol Turned the Supreme Court Justices into Art Critics