On remand after reversal of an order dismissing the complaint (Sicre De Fontbrune v. Wolfsy (9th Cir. 2016) 838 F.3d 992), this decision reverses a summary judgment in defendant’s favor refusing to enforce a French judgment for “astreinte” damages for using photos of Picasso paintings infringing plaintiff’s copyright in the photos. The French judgment that plaintiff sought to enforce was not contrary to California public policy. While French law does not have a “fair use” defense and so might in some cases allow damages for infringements that American law would allow as constitutionally protected free speech, here Wolfsy did not qualify for fair use protection under American law because he made a commercial, non-transformative use of the photos. Hence, the French judgment against him did not violate California public policy. The French court did not lack subject matter jurisdiction even though the plaintiff may have lacked standing due to his assignment of rights in the photos to a business entity. Lack of standing does not deprive the court of subject matter jurisdiction. Wolfsy waived any objection to personal jurisdiction in France by voluntarily appearing in the French proceeding by petitioning the French court to set aside the judgment against him. Genuine issues remained as to whether process had been properly served on Wolfsy and whether he could avoid enforcement of the judgment on the ground the judgment was obtained by fraud because plaintiff concealed the fact he had transferred rights in the photos to a business entity.