Tattoo Artist Sues THQ for Copyright Infringement

[orangeapples]

Note to self: become tattoo artist and work with famous people for cheap (or free). Then every time I see their image I'll look for the tattoo. If I see it, I'll sue whoever created that image.

 

[Eleuthera]

...although I think Escobedo is the tattoo artist and Condit UFC fighter...

You are correct, my bad.

 

[JSoup]

I'll bet if I hop over to DeviantArt I'll find a few threads going about "how dare they infringe that artists copyright!" I bring DA up specifically because this happens all the time with people taking tattoo designs and getting them done without permission.

One particular case jumps to mind from about 8 years ago. An artist (that is no longer on DA and whose name I've long since forgot) of some repute tossed up a really nice back piece he designed, specifically stating that he'd go, and I quote, "legal apeshit" if he saw someone with it tattooed on them without his permission. Less than a week later, someone uploaded an image of the finished piece, captioned with "see you in court".

Artist sued the guy, case was thrown out. Judge stated that he wasn't convinced this constituted a copyright violation, as such laws normally make allowances for personal, non-commercial use and, further, there were no specific laws governing tattoos aside from the normal "you must be 18+ to get one" thing.

 

[Strazdas]

What about people who design their own tattoos then? I have several friends who drew their own tattoos and then a tattoo artist put them on their body.

Then the tattoo artist has no claim to it.
But imagine if some guy drew a really awesome picture. And then someone recreated it in a game without asking the original artist for permission to do so.

thats how internet works.

 

[Royas]

Given that in order to represent the fighter accurately requires the image of the tattoo, I'm not sure where the artist has a leg to stand on. If it was on another person's image, if it was printed on a wall, if it was drawn independently of Condit in any medium, then yes, clearly there is a copyright issue. But not in the case of making an accurate reproduction of the actual person. One hopes that common sense will rule in this case.

 

[BaronIveagh]

It depends entirely if the artists design was part of a copyrighted portfolio or a custom work the fighter had done. If it's part of the artists portfolio, and he had the ink done based on it, then, yes, the artist owns the copyright. If the fighter commissioned the artist for a new image, that's work for hire and the copyright belongs to the fighter.

 

[Something Amyss]

This can't fall under copyright law since that specifies that the artist owns part of the persons body because of the image and has rights to it for the existence of the tattoo

No, it actually doesn't. There is no issue, for example, with the tattoo showing up in televised matches.

what they're doing here is literally reproduce it.

 

[Something Amyss]

So if a plastic surgeon used a specific technique particular to themselves in performing surgery on a celebrity, and that celebrity's digital likeness appeared in a game, would they have similar recourse?

One cannot copyright a technique.

When you tattoo someone, that tattoo becomes part of their body. It doesn't instill in you the right to control what they do with their body.

Good thing that literally nobody is saying otherwise.

THQ is already not doing hot, and now hacks come out of the woodwork for lawsuits?

They're having tough times? Gee, that's too bad, but so what?

 

[j0frenzy]

So a lot of things to clarify here (because I don't know enough to shut up when the internet is mad by perceived faults in the legal system)
1)A suit here does not mean that Escobedo is not also suing Condit. Or that they haven't already made an agreement. Or any of a number of possible situations. One act can create multiple law suits and it is at the discretion of the plaintiff who gets sued when and how. And the suit against Condit is hardly likely to make news here.
2)THQ is a big business. They probably have an in house attorney. They aren't going to go broke because they have to defend themselves from a law suit.
3)THQ being near bankrupt doesn't absolve them from liability. If they screwed up and didn't get legal permission, that is their fault. This is why you hire lawyers.
4)Copyright law is an entangled mess that is its own specialization in the legal world. I am not a specialist in intellectual property, nor do I really know anything about property law. I can take guesses at laws, but none of it really matters. I would imagine that since you are talking about an image derived from another person's image that was paid for, damages would be calculated as a percentage of the amount paid for the original image. But again, not an expert in property law.

 

[Chris Mosher]

...Really? COME ON legal system! It's not like THQ was actually aware they were committing copyright infringement, wringing their hands and laughing fiendishly while they forced the developers to include the damn tattoo. 'Cuase that's REALLY going to draw in the crowds, right?

Whatever you may think of THQ as a publisher, it's sad this is happening to them in their current financial state. Pretty pathetic.

Why couldn't Escobedo be more like that guy whose art was illegally lifted to make the Borderlands 2 reverse cover? That guy was pretty much flattered they used his work (although disappointed they didn't ask him first) and didn't press charges. And because he was so chill about it, Pitchford called him up, and I assume paid him some cash for compensation. That's how it's done.

My understanding is that this could be very damaging for the original artist. Once you fail to defend your copyright it makes it harder for the original artist to defend against further violation. Also, if you put your time and effort, why should you just sit back and let your copy right be taken advantage of while some one tramples your ownership of an image for their financial benefit. You own it and someone else if profiting from your work, the Borderlands artist can do want he wants but i think he could be hurt by this.

Now the tattoo thing maybe different because it becomes part of the wearer's own image.

 

[MetalMagpie]

Silly Artists!
Don't you know that only multi-national corporations can use copyright law to their advantage. And here you are thinking that they can help protect your rights as an artist.

Be fair, this seems more like an abuse of copyright law. Or does this tattoo artist ask for royalties whenever Carlos Condit is photographed without his shirt on? Seems insane if it's copyright infringement to sell a picture of yourself, just because you have a tattoo.

 

[Dead Seerius]

...Really? COME ON legal system! It's not like THQ was actually aware they were committing copyright infringement, wringing their hands and laughing fiendishly while they forced the developers to include the damn tattoo. 'Cuase that's REALLY going to draw in the crowds, right?

Whatever you may think of THQ as a publisher, it's sad this is happening to them in their current financial state. Pretty pathetic.

Why couldn't Escobedo be more like that guy whose art was illegally lifted to make the Borderlands 2 reverse cover? That guy was pretty much flattered they used his work (although disappointed they didn't ask him first) and didn't press charges. And because he was so chill about it, Pitchford called him up, and I assume paid him some cash for compensation. That's how it's done.

My understanding is that this could be very damaging for the original artist. Once you fail to defend your copyright it makes it harder for the original artist to defend against further violation. Also, if you put your time and effort, why should you just sit back and let your copy right be taken advantage of while some one tramples your ownership of an image for their financial benefit. You own it and someone else if profiting from your work, the Borderlands artist can do want he wants but i think he could be hurt by this.

Now the tattoo thing maybe different because it becomes part of the wearer's own image.

Yeah, I see what you mean and I agree. I didn't mean to make it sound like no artist should take claim to their work if it's infringed. In fact, if the Borderlands 2 guy HAD pressed charges I would have been totally on his side. The lift was pretty blatant.

I just meant that when compared to how the Borderlands guy handled an infringement that was actually a justifiable reason to sue, Escobedo seems a wee bit entitled to me.

 

[AnarchistFish]

Escobedo is asking the courts for all profits associated with the tattoo's use

So, fuck all?

There's no problem here. This guy's just an opportunist. Can't blame him, really. If the law tells you there's a problem with something that you could benefit from of course you're gonna try cashing in on it.

 

[Chris Mosher]

-snip-

Yeah, I see what you mean and I agree. I didn't mean to make it sound like no artist should take claim to their work if it's infringed. In fact, if the Borderlands 2 guy HAD pressed charges I would have been totally on his side. The lift was pretty blatant.

I just meant that when compared to how the Borderlands guy handled an infringement that was actually a justifiable reason to sue, Escobedo seems a wee bit entitled to me.

I figured that's what you meant and that's why I was bit more apprehensive about Escobedo, but I may be from Harlan Ellison school of thought on creative works. Which give nothing away for free, they will only expect more for free.

Now for Escobedo, I think its a bit dicey, I am a bit of a legal nerd so seeing who owns the copyright to such things is actually fascinating.

 

[Excludos]

I kinda get where they're coming from. I mean, everyone knows UFC Undisputed is a Tattoo simulator. The money lost for this tattoo shop must be in the billions.

Honestly, is there a single soul who still thinks the copyright system is actually working these days? Theres way fewer "support the creator" then there is "endless cash crab" at this point.

 

[Saregon]

So go by this logic they can sue the UFC for the TV airing and selling the DVDs of his fights?

What it looks like from other cases is that there is an understood agreement between the client and tattoo artist that their work will be filmed, photographed and such, especially when the client is famous.

THQ however recreated the image, which is where the whole thing gets murky.

Not really though. I mean, the first laws of ownership were based on the concept that one can not own anything but one's own body and the work one can excercise with that body. Basically, no one but Condit has any right to the earnings made using his likeness. Now I'm not a lawyer, and this is simply based on a college philosophy class. Anyway, this seems pretty simple to me, THQ presumably signed a contract with Condit for the use of his likeness. The tattoo is part of his likeness, and thus included in said contract. And anyway, it's a tattoo of a tiger, one of the most common images in tattooing, and I don't see this going anywhere but in the judge's trash bin. On a related note, I'd not be very pleased if I allowed someone to use my likeness for whatever, and then the tattoo artist that made mine came and wanted cash for it as well, and my most visible tattoo is a hell of a lot rarer than a tiger. Not very pleased at all.

Captcha: roll over. Seems captcha disagrees with me.

 

[kaizen2468]

Sure give him $1,000 and call it a day. No one bought it to look at his tattoo.

 

[Vivi22]

The tattoo artist already was compensated when the fighter paid him to draw what he wanted on him.

This is why I don't totally buy that the artist does own the rights to the work to be honest. When you pay a tattoo artist for a tattoo, you are basically commissioning artwork from them. You have paid them to create this work, and I don't think it's unreasonable to argue that the client then owns that work, not the artist. Just as if a developer pays its employees or an outside contractor to do design work on a game, the developer owns the work, not the employee or contractor. The two situations are in essence very similar which is why this suit sounds like bullshit to me. Maybe there's some law I don't know about which governs the copyright of tattoos though. If there is something on the books which makes his complaint legally valid then I'm not sure I agree with it.

The man was paid to make some artwork. He made said artwork. He's already been compensated and I don't think he should be able to claim ownership of it. Certainly not in the case of recreating a persons likeness in a game. At the very least, he should be directing his lawsuit at the people who licensed that likeness to THQ, not THQ themselves. They obtained those rights in good faith. If the fighter didn't have the right to sell rights to that aspect of his likeness then he should be the one taken to court.

 

[BaronIveagh]

This is why I don't totally buy that the artist does own the rights to the work to be honest. When you pay a tattoo artist for a tattoo, you are basically commissioning artwork from them. You have paid them to create this work, and I don't think it's unreasonable to argue that the client then owns that work, not the artist.

See my earlier post. If the tattoo artist made this tat uniquely for this customer, then yes. However, many tattoo artists have copyrighted portfolios of tattoo designs that they've created which you can pick out of the book.

In the event of the former, you're correct. In the event that he just picked the design out of the book, then, no, the artist retains copyright.

 

[Olrod]

Wait...Why exactly is this worth suing over? The guy has a tattoo on him,so they have it in the game. What exactly is the problem here?

Because $$$Ka-CHING!$$$


That's why. He's seen an opportunity to screw someone out of some money, and by f**k is he going to squeeze for all it's worth!

[captcha: take it all]
Once again Captcha, you keep acing that Turing test.