Interestingly, there is an exception here when it comes to portraits, with the copyright for tattoo portraits likely owned by the person who paid for it. In both countries, where a tattooist creates a design in the course of their employment, their employer will be the copyright owner. All of these rights can be varied by contract. Read more: To dye for? Jury still out on tattoo ink causing cancer. Despite the law in this area, copying is common in the tattoo industry both here and in New Zealand.
My unpublished research among tattooists in New Zealand suggests there can be a lot of pressure from clients to copy existing images. Clients often request direct reproductions of imagery they have downloaded. In these circumstances, appropriation can be a pragmatic business decision. However, there may be some steps that can be followed in order to avoid a costly judgement or settlement. First, the tattoo must be copyrightable subject matter.
For example, a tattoo must be both original, and the tattoo artist must be the author. So, if the design is not new, or if the tattoo artist did not originate the design, then there may not be any infringement concerns. Second, the tattoo recipient can negotiate regarding who owns rights regarding the tattoo. If the tattoo artist agrees that the tattoo is a work-for-hire product, then there may not be an infringement issue. Additionally, the tattoo artist may agrees to license the tattoo design for reproduction.
Third, at least some uses may fall under a fair use defense. But, for companies planning to create reproductions of a potentially copyrightable tattoo, it may be better to ask for permission than to hope for forgiveness. Image Source: Deposit Photos. Read more. Interesting article! I have pieces where the original idea was mine and where I worked closely with the artist to agree on colors, placement, style, and more.
Surely at some point I would become a coauthor. Also, can an argument be made that so long as I have one other tattoo or intend to get another that the artist is contributing to a compilation or collective work such that the tattoo is always a work for hire? Do you have authority for the proposition that intending a collection necessitates the work for hire status?
It appears the site i was using to look at 17 U. Thanks fellow Anon — the reason why I asked was that the work for hire doctrine was the very first thing that I thought of in relation to the fact that the person obtaining the tattoo is expressly paying for that service.
Creativity is highly valued within this artist community. In some art industries, there can be a big gap between holding rights and exercising them. To tattooists, appropriation is mostly seen as a matter of ethics or manners rather than law. Many tattooists are skeptical of litigation. There is also a view that the tattoo belongs to the client not the artist because money changed hands.
Tattooists tend to only threaten legal action when the infringement of their design involves a tattoo on the body of a high profile celebrity. Tattooists tend to only threaten legal action when the infringement of their design involves a tattoo on the body of a high profile celebrity such as footballer David Beckham , UFC fighter Carlos Condit , or NBA player Rasheed Wallace.
Even then, they might be criticised by other tattooists for threatening to enforce their copyright. There have been no high profile tattoo infringements in Australia. These norms aside, copyright law does apply to tattoos. What could be more intimately a part of you than a work of body art permanently inked into your skin? You probably assume that the tattoo on your body belongs to you. But, in actuality, somebody else might own your tattoo.
Recent lawsuits and events have shown that tattoo artists and companies can have intellectual property rights in tattoos worn by others, including both copyright and trademark rights. Tattoo-related lawsuits are not uncommon. Just this year, a group of tattoo artists for several high-profile athletes, including Lebron James and Kobe Bryant, filed a copyright lawsuit against the creators of the popular NBA 2K video game franchise because tattoos they created appear in NBA 2K The case is still pending in a New York federal court.
In , S. Entertainment, Inc. The parties ultimately settled before a court could make a determination on the copyright claims. To avoid being sued, Penix agreed to several terms, including some restrictions on how his fist could and could not be photographed.
0コメント