Some Potential Damages in NBA 2K Tattoo Lawsuit Have Been Dismissed

[Phreezy P]

I'm just hoping they don't get affected by this for future releases. Hopefully they find a way to get in contact with some tattoo parlors to make sure they aren't infringing upon anything. I just hope they don't go the Madden route and clear all the tattoos out the game.

[bigdipper88]

Quote: Originally Posted by Junior Moe

Wow! That's a good point. I wonder if I got Mickey Mouse tatted on my arm could Disney sue the tattoo artist. That's interesting...

CM Punk never had his Pepsi or Cobra Commander tats in wrestling games, so I can see where that comes into play

[wallofhate]

It's both for me. It bugs me that it threatens the authenticity but I can't lie it also bothers me that this is even a thing. I find it stupid for coming from tattoo artist of all ppl who for the money will tattoo anything. I get the scenario of a graphics designer creating something of a painter creating something and someone uses their creation likeness to profit but this is more of a stretch imo. Taking advantage of the system is legal but a waste of time and money and a get cash quick angle. Even the tattoo artist that was suing the hangover movie I thought was dumb too.

[CaseIH]

Quote: Originally Posted by Vni

Shouldn't tattoos become the player's property ? I don't really get it. It's on their body, most likely they've decided what they wanted to draw on their body, I don't get why do the tattoo artists own them.

Yep, thats my feeling as well. Glad 2k won this argument, always someone out there trying to get a free handout, it seems to be the New American way, rather than working hard for it and earning it.

[nuckles2k2]

Quote: Originally Posted by mcpats

Sure they own the art, meaning other artists can't steal that design and use it on their own clients. It also means 2k can't take a specific tattoo off LeBron and make it available for your MyPlayer or your center court logo, which they do not do. However, a person's pigment is part of their likeness, whether it's their natural born color or if it's been electively altered (i.e. tattoo).

They also can't package it in something that they monetarily gain from. No it's not called Tats 2K16, but they're still in the game, a game that's not free.

That's just how licensing goes.

If I don't license my code in a way where someone else can take it and use it in a commercial product -- but they do anyway, no matter how small...they're stealing. I didn't give them permission to use this when they make a single cent. So don't do it. Use something else, or get permission.

I can see both side of this argument. It does seem kind of petty tho. Where were they all those years ago?

[Junior Moe]

Quote: Originally Posted by bigdipper88

CM Punk never had his Pepsi or Cobra Commander tats in wrestling games, so I can see where that comes into play

Hopefully 2K and others go that route and just alter the designs that way they're clear of lawsuits and we still get to keep the semblance of realism.

[aholbert32]

A tattoo is a work of art.

Just like a painting.
Just like a photograph.
Just like a movie.
Just like a song.

Because its a work of art, its protected by US copyright laws. One of those laws is that the artist who created the work of art has the right to decide who can copy his/her artwork. He also has the right to demand payment from people who copy or create other versions of his work.

[aholbert32]

Quote: Originally Posted by nuckles2k2

I can see both side of this argument. It does seem kind of petty tho. Where were they all those years ago?

Not everyone is a gamer. They may not have realized that the tattoos were being replicated until years after they started doing it.