"There is little question that what constitutes fair use is still in the eye of the beholder after this decision."
Nicholas O'Donnell and Mitchell Stein of Sullivan & Worcester on the Richard Prince decision:
"What is clear after Cariou, however, is that artists, museums and galleries involved in any appropriative art are in a more precarious position than ever before. ... [T]he potential for a chilling effect on such works is clear; the threat of damages of this sort may simply steer artists away from creating, and museums and galleries away from showing, anything close to the edge. Would a gallery with the chance to exhibit the newly-created still lives and collages of Picasso showing Le Journal, or a museum with the chance to show the contemporary work of Duchamp and its appropriation of the Western canon, have taken the chance if privy to this decision?"
"What is clear after Cariou, however, is that artists, museums and galleries involved in any appropriative art are in a more precarious position than ever before. ... [T]he potential for a chilling effect on such works is clear; the threat of damages of this sort may simply steer artists away from creating, and museums and galleries away from showing, anything close to the edge. Would a gallery with the chance to exhibit the newly-created still lives and collages of Picasso showing Le Journal, or a museum with the chance to show the contemporary work of Duchamp and its appropriation of the Western canon, have taken the chance if privy to this decision?"

<< Home