Did Andy Warhol ask and receive the Campbell Soup Company's permission
to reproduce  unmistakeable images of their soup cans, or pay that
company royalties contingent on sale of his artwork? Or did he simply
use the images at no charge? Yes, I know...artistic license, public
domain, etc, etc.

---

Clarification of Question by monroe22-ga on 28 Apr 2004 18:40 PDT

hlabadie-ga: Rephrase, if you like,or restate your comment of 4/26 and
I will accept it as an answer.
Thanks,
monroe22-ga

There was no need to obtain permission, as Warhol was not treading
upon trademark infringement. See:

http://www.cni.org/Hforums/cni-copyright/1998-03/0557.html

Campbell's trademark was not in the public domain, but there was no
infringemnt. The Barbie cases confirm the principle.

hlabadie-ga

hlabadie-ga: I accept your comment as an answer...post it as an answer.
Thanks, 
monroe22-ga

Howdy monroe22-ga,

This other message on the same site contains some notes of interest.
http://www.cni.org/Hforums/cni-copyright/1999-02/0100.html

" ...
> > > It was only after Warhol's death, when the Andy Warhol Foundation
> > > began making licensing agreements with various manufacturers to
> > > use Warhol's imagery on products, that there was an official legal
> > > agreement between the Andy Warhol Foundation and Campbell Soup
> > > Company. Presently, both parties own a stake in the copyright and
> > > neither party can make licensing agreements without the other
> > > party's permission.
...
> > > So, to answer your question, while he was alive, Warhol did retain
> > > the copyright to his own artworks but never addressed the issue
> > > himself as far as Campbell Soup Company was concerned.
..."

Looking Forward, denco-ga - Google Answers Researcher