Case 1:15-cv-10160-SAS Document 21 Filed 02/26/16 Page 1 of 30 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK DONALD GRAHAM, Plaintiff -against- No. 1:15-cv-10160-SAS RICHARD PRINCE, GAGOSIAN Oral Argument Requested GALLERY, INC., and LAWRENCE GAGOSIAN, Defendants MEMORANDUM OF LAW IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS Matthew S. Dontzin Tibor L. Nagy Tracy . Appleton DOonTZIN NAGY & FLEIssiG LLP 980 Madison Avenue New York, New York 10075 (212) 717-2900 Attorneys for Defendants Gagosian Gallery, Inc,, and Lawrence Gagosian Joshua I, Schiller Matthew L. Schwartz Frederick J. Lee Benjamin Margulis BOIEs, SCHILLER & FLEXNER LLP 575 Lexington Avenue New York, NY 10022 (212) 446-2300 Attorneys for Defendant Richard PrinceCase 1:15-cv-10160-SAS Document 21 Filed 02/26/16 Page 2 of 30 TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS... TABLE OF AUTHORITIES PRELIMINARY STATEMENT . BACKGROUND A. Background on Appropriation Art and Richard Prince B. The Cariou v. Prince Decision C. The New Portraits Exhibitior 9 LEGAL STANDARD. 12 ARGUMENT... B I, PRINCE'S ARTWORK IS FAIR USE. 1B A. The Purpose-And-Character Factor Weighs In Favor Of Prince Because His Artwork Is Transformative. B 1. Prince’s Artwork Is Transformative. 14 2. Commerciality Is Of Limited Weight Because Prince’s Artwork Is ‘Transformative. . 7 B. The Nature-Of-The-Work Factor Is Of “Limited Usefulness” Because Prince's Artwork Is Transformative. 18 C. The Amount-And-Substantiality Factor Weighs In Favor Of Prince Because His Use Is Reasonable In Light Of His Purpose. 18 D. The Market-Effect Factor Favors Prince As His Artwork Is Transformative And Fills A Market Niche That Graham Has No Interest In Occupying 19 Il. | GRAHAM'S DAMAGES SHOULD BE LIMITED AS A MATTER OF LAW TO ANY PROFITS OBTAINED FROM THE SALE OF UNTITLED... 22 CONCLUSION. 25Case 1:15-cv-10160-SAS Document 21 Filed 02/26/16 Page 3 of 30 TABLE OF AUTHORITIES Page(s) CASES: Am. Geophysical Union v. Texaco, Inc., 60 F.3d 913 (2d Cir. 1994)... Antenna Television v. Aegean Video Inc., No. 95-CV-2328 ERK, 1996 WL 298252 (E.D.N.Y. Apr. 23, 1996).. Ashcroft v. Igbal, 556 US. 662 (2009)... 12, 23, Authors Guild v. Google, Inc., 804 F.3d 202 (2d Cir. 2015)... Authors Guild, Inc. v. HathiTrust, 755 F.3d 87 (2d Cir. 2014)....... we 20 Baker v. Urban Outfitters, Inc., 254 F. Supp. 2d 346 (S.D.N.Y. 2003). 4, 22-24 Bell Ail. Corp. v. Twombly, 350 US. 544 (2007). 2,23 Bill Graham Archives v. Dorling Kindersley Ltd., 448 F.3d 605 (2d Cir. 2006) .. 3, 18,19 Blanch v. Koons, 467 F.3d 244 (2d Cir. 2006) .. 1,2, 15, 16, 18-20 Brownmark Films, LLC v. Comedy Partners, 682 F.3d 687 (7th Cir. 2012)... Campbell v, Acuff-Rose Music, In 510 U.S, 569 (1994) 12, 13 3,8, 12-14, 16, 17, 19 Cariou v, Prince, 714 F.3d 694 (2d Cir. 2013)... -9, 12-14, 16-21 Castle Rock Entm’t, Inc. v. Carol Pub. Group, Inc., 150 F.3d 132 (2d Cir. 1998). 14, 15, 20 Ez-Tixz, Inc. v. Hit-Tix, Ine., 919 F. Supp. 728 (S.D.N.Y. 1996) 25 Fournier v. Erickson, 202 F. Supp. 2d 290 (S.D.N.Y. 2002) ..