Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/22pdf/21-869_87ad.pdf
Page Number: 7.0

Cite as:  598 U. S. ____ (2023) 

1 

Opinion of the Court 

NOTICE: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the 
United  States  Reports.  Readers  are  requested  to  notify  the  Reporter  of 
Decisions,  Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States,  Washington,  D. C.  20543, 
pio@supremecourt.gov, of any typographical or other formal errors. 

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES 

_________________ 

No. 21–869 
_________________ 

ANDY WARHOL FOUNDATION FOR THE VISUAL 
ARTS, INC., PETITIONER v. LYNN 
GOLDSMITH, ET AL. 

ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF 
APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT 

[May 18, 2023] 

JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR delivered the opinion of the Court. 
This copyright case involves not one, but two artists.  The 
first, Andy Warhol, is well known.  His images of products 
like  Campbell’s  soup  cans  and  of  celebrities  like  Marilyn 
Monroe  appear  in  museums  around  the  world.    Warhol’s 
contribution to contemporary art is undeniable.

The second, Lynn Goldsmith, is less well known.  But she 
too  was  a  trailblazer.  Goldsmith  began  a  career  in  rock-
and-roll  photography  when  there  were  few  women  in  the 
genre.  Her  award-winning  concert  and  portrait  images,
however,  shot  to  the  top.    Goldsmith’s  work  appeared  in 
Life,  Time,  Rolling  Stone,  and  People  magazines,  not  to 
mention the National Portrait Gallery and the Museum of 
Modern Art.  She captured some of the 20th century’s great-
est rock stars: Bob Dylan, Mick Jagger, Patti Smith, Bruce
Springsteen, and, as relevant here, Prince. 

In 1984, Vanity Fair sought to license one of Goldsmith’s
Prince  photographs  for  use  as  an  “artist  reference.”    The 
magazine wanted the photograph to help illustrate a story
about  the  musician.  Goldsmith  agreed,  on  the  condition