copyright law — Online Journal — Columbia Undergraduate Law Review

The Andy Warhol of Cryptocurrency: Legal Pursuit of Non-Fungible Tokens

The works of Andy Warhol are known for their popular element and pragmatic flair. Not unlike blockchain technology, the repetitive faces of Marilyn Monroe are an appealing democratization of society’s likenesses. Indeed, both pose questions about cultural and individual copyright, and whether popularity excuses infringements on ownership. Cryptocurrency has given birth to a new form of technology responsible for enormous growth in the art trade and an accompanying slew of legal discrepancies. Non-fungible tokens, or NFTs, are a revolutionary kind of digital ledger that allows creators of art and music to tokenize unique online assets of their work. [1] Yet they come almost as an anachronism to a legal environment not entirely prepared to regulate them. [2]

Henry WagerJanuary 19, 2022NFTs, art, intellectual property law, copyright law

Banksy Hits a Wall: Why the Artist Secured Trademarks Out of Necessity, Not Bad Faith

Banksy, whose real name and identity have never been formally disclosed, has long made anonymity central to his work and identity as an artist. His anonymity is not only central to his artistic persona, but it also contributes to the value of his creations, many of which have fetched seven and eight-digit prices at the world’s most prestigious auction houses. Yet as Banksy’s fame and notoriety have increased, so too have the number of people profiting off the appropriation and sale of his designs. However, Banksy’s anonymity made the fulfillment of this wish difficult: in order to allege copyright infringement on his designs, Banksy would have to reveal his full, legal identity to prove he is the “unquestionable owner,” which would severely, if not irreparably, undermine his persona and the value of his work.

Mariah HesserJanuary 1, 2021copyright law, trademark, art

The Intellectual Property Implications of Star Athletica v. Varsity Brands

While most recent advancements in copyright law focus on mainstream technological or media-based infringements, intellectual property scholars were dealt a landmark decision in a more unconventional facet of the law: fashion. Star Athletica, LLC v. Varsity Brands, Inc (2017) [1], decided after 8 months of deliberation in the U.S. Supreme Court, examined a lawsuit brought forth by Varsity Brands when Star Athletica began to produce cheerleading uniforms with chevrons, zigzags, and other aesthetic elements similar in design to those produced by Varsity Brands, but at a far lower price [2].

Itsy, Bitsy, and Vulnerable? The Need for Greater Jurisprudence in the World of Fashion

In June 2013, Ipek Irgit debuted her bikini line Kiini. Fun and flirty, the crocheted, triangle bikini soon became all the rage among Instagram models and stylists. By 2014, the swimsuit was featured in Vogue.com, Women’s Health Magazine, and even named “the hottest bikini this summer” by People magazine. [1] While the designer’s business was booming, she was also facing significant obstacles. Irgit’s biggest hurdle? The hundreds of counterfeit Kiinis that swarmed the Internet and were creating profit for others off of her work.