Comments on: Was Warhol Ever Sued? http://www.aphotoeditor.com/2009/07/17/was-warhol-ever-sued/ Former Photography Director Rob Haggart Sat, 21 Nov 2009 08:04:45 -0600 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: Erik Dungan http://www.aphotoeditor.com/2009/07/17/was-warhol-ever-sued/comment-page-1/#comment-48551 Erik Dungan Sun, 19 Jul 2009 21:58:22 +0000 http://www.aphotoeditor.com/?p=3582#comment-48551 @Will Seberger, I imagine it's because Disney didn't need the money. @Will Seberger, I imagine it’s because Disney didn’t need the money.

]]> By: Will Seberger http://www.aphotoeditor.com/2009/07/17/was-warhol-ever-sued/comment-page-1/#comment-48443 Will Seberger Fri, 17 Jul 2009 19:18:06 +0000 http://www.aphotoeditor.com/?p=3582#comment-48443 I think the difference with Warhol is that by 1966, he had a pretty good chunk of change to his name; which of course is why the suits were filed. There was something to be had. Having some money and canvas to dispose of made paying the "shut-up-and-go-away" settlement easier than fighting in the courts. As near as I can tell, there was never a finding. He always settled; even if it was after the trial started. Just because a civil suit was filed is not indication of any wrongdoing. Paying a settlement is not an acknowledgment of anything other than the defendant feeling (for any number of reasons) that the settlement is cheaper/easier than even a victory in the courtroom. I'd be extremely interested to hear what the actual terms of the settlement were. I suspect they were a lot less than the damages/settlement sought today. Totally bizarre that Disney didn't go after him... I think the difference with Warhol is that by 1966, he had a pretty good chunk of change to his name; which of course is why the suits were filed. There was something to be had.

Having some money and canvas to dispose of made paying the “shut-up-and-go-away” settlement easier than fighting in the courts. As near as I can tell, there was never a finding. He always settled; even if it was after the trial started.

Just because a civil suit was filed is not indication of any wrongdoing. Paying a settlement is not an acknowledgment of anything other than the defendant feeling (for any number of reasons) that the settlement is cheaper/easier than even a victory in the courtroom.

I’d be extremely interested to hear what the actual terms of the settlement were. I suspect they were a lot less than the damages/settlement sought today.

Totally bizarre that Disney didn’t go after him…

]]>