3 ms·

> protected by U.S. law Not entirely: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cariou_v._Prince https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cariou_v._Prince No definitive decision, an

• pc86 11y ago
  Did you read the article? The original court found in favor of Cariou, Price appealed, and won the appeal. Second Circuit Court found it fair use.
  • jgeada 11y ago
    Because you cannot break the law if you're rich enough to afford perpetual appeals and good lawyers?
    • pc86 11y ago
      I'm not sure what comment you're replying to, but I'm assuming it's not mine since you're not replying to anything that I actually said. > No definitive decision, and the case was settled. Both statements are factually wrong. I'm not saying I agree with the Second Circuit's decision, I'm saying that there was a definitive decision, the case was not settled. And I'm not sure a single appeal constitutes "perpetual."
  • chasing 11y ago
    Wait, did you? "The court found 25 of 30 works to be transformative fair use under its standard, and remanded the case to the lower court for reconsideration of 5 of the works under the Second Circuit's new standard." "On March 18, 2014, Cariou and Prince announced that they had settled the case." Seems like they mostly found for him, but not 100%. And before the lower court could have the final say, I'm guessing Prince settled out of court. The last thing he needs is any judgment against him. Seems like that could open him up to a flood of lawsuits. So it's kind of ambiguous. And, yeah, probably only ambiguous because he has the cash to put up a fight.