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

[RaychelSnr]

It appears the folks at 2K won a major legal challenge against the use of tattoos in NBA 2K16:

Quote:

2K and parent company Take-Two can breath a sigh of relief following the dismissal of some requested damages in a lawsuit that might have cost the company billions. A case brought by tattoo designer Solid Oak Sketches attempted to secure statutory damages of $150,000 per infringement for unauthorized use of eight designs in NBA 2K16. United States district judge Laura Taylor Swan granted 2K’s motion to dismiss statutory based on timing of the design copyright. The first use of the tattoo images was in 2013’s NBA 2K14. The designs were not copyrighted until 2015.

As we reported on back in February, this suit is exactly why other games don't really use player tattoos unless they are fully licensed.

2K won this challenge on a technicality, which could have cost Take Two upwards of a billion dollars in damages. However, it is likely that tattoos in NBA 2K (and other sports games) will continue to grow scarcer due to copyright and licensing issues.

Take Two is still potentially on the hook for some damages in the case so they aren't out of the woods yet, however the total damages they may have been on the hook for has lessened considerably after today's ruling.

[sane478]

You would think one would appreciate the free advertising. I guess I get it though.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[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.

[sane478]

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.

Yea that whole concept seems confusing to me, unless it's a original design they drew and the artist wanted it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Hooe]

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.

The intellectual property of the art which comprises the tattoo still belongs to the artist.

A second artist may not recreate that art in another medium (in this case, a texture for a video game) and then sell it for a profit; that's infringing on the original artist's intellectual property rights.

[gabs485]

Quote: Originally Posted by CM Hooe

The intellectual property of the art which comprises the tattoo still belongs to the artist. A second artist may not recreate that art in another medium (in this case, a texture for a video game) and then sell it for a profit; that's infringing on the original artist's intellectual property rights.

This is why I don't like lawyers. They are the only ones trying to make money off these lawsuits.

I understand the legality but still, there's no way the use of the tattoos in the game caused any harm to anyone, not physically or economically.

Also, doesn't 2k has the right to use player likeness in the game? I thought tattoos were part of someone's likeness. This is getting ridiculous.

What's next? Are barbers going to start suing too? I can see Lebron's barber being like I gave him his signature hairline, you can't copy it! It's my creation.

Get outta here, someone needs to put a stop to this none sense.

[Hooe]

Quote: Originally Posted by gabs485

I understand the legality but still, there's no way the use of the tattoos in the game caused any harm to anyone, not physically or economically.

The original artist of the tattoo is being directly harmed in this case; 2K Sports is making money off his art work without compensating him.

Quote:

Also, doesn't 2k has the right to use player likeness in the game? I thought tattoos were part of someone's likeness.

The courts have repeatedly decided that this is not the case.

[NDAlum]

So this isn't really even a victory, it's a technicality.

I understand but I still hate it.