Sam Eichner Image

Sam Eichner

Copyright and Trademark Litigator

Pillsbury Law

Sam Eichner is a member of Pillsbury’s Intellectual Property practice in New York where his practice focuses on copyright and trademark disputes in federal court and before the U.S. Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB). As a copyright and trademark litigator, Sam represents clients across industries—from fashion e-tailers and blockchain developers to universities and non-profit organizations. Sam has litigated cases to trial, and resolved many disputes through settlement and mediation, invariably seeking practical business solutions for his clients. He also has extensive experience coordinating trademark enforcement and portfolio management for some of the world’s most renowned brands, and routinely advises on a wide variety of IP and entertainment matters.

Recent Articles by Sam Eichner

Warhol’s Ghost in the Machine: What Warhol v. Goldsmith Means for Generative AI

On May 18, 2023, the U.S. Supreme Court answered an exceedingly narrow question of copyright law with potentially sweeping impact: did the purpose and character of Andy Warhol’s below ‘Orange Prince’ work—as used on a 2016 Condé Nast magazine cover—support fair use of Lynn Goldsmith’s photograph of famed musician Prince Rogers Nelson a/k/a Prince?  In a 7-2 decision, the Court found that it does not, calling into question nearly 30 years of fair use jurisprudence, arguably narrowing the scope of that doctrine, and potentially threatening disciplines that rely on it, e.g., appropriation art. The decision is also sure to impact generative artificial intelligence (“AI”), an emerging technology that is also likely to rely heavily on fair use.

The Cost of Honest Mistakes: Even After Unicolors, Copyright Application Errors May Still Have Consequences

On February 24, 2022, the U.S. Supreme Court vacated the Ninth Circuit’s ruling in Unicolors, Inc. v. H&M Hennes & Mauritz, L.P., No. 20–915 (Feb. 24, 2022). The Court held that a copyright registration applicant, if unaware of legal inaccuracies in a copyright application, does not submit those inaccuracies “knowingly” for purposes of Section 411(b)(2), and as such, does not lose the protections of the Copyright Act’s safe harbor for registrations with inaccuracies. Undoubtedly, the decision is a win for authors that, during the copyright application process, unwittingly submit inaccurate information to the U.S. Copyright Office (e.g., because they did not understand the law, and/or were not assisted by competent copyright counsel). That said, the decision does not do away with the risks associated with honest mistakes in U.S. Copyright Office filings, and authors should take care to mitigate such risks.