Take-Two Interactive & Visual Concepts Sued By Tattoo Artists

[cjallure24]

Quote: Originally Posted by snc237

Am I the only one that thinks if you get a tattoo that's it's yours. Cause the way this sounds they should also be able to sue Nike cause his tattos are viable in the shoe commercials. Or what ever company makes posters with him on it. I think it's a little outrages that people have control over you cause you paid them to ink you.

This was my first thought. If you pay for something you requested, and is personal to you. Doesn't that make it officially yours? I mean, I don't see any copyright logo under or near the tattoo.

Sent from my SM-N900T using Tapatalk

[swiftkid]

2k makes that off VC alone... no biggie

[MoneyOvaHuds]

Quote: Originally Posted by redsox4evur

Really? So tell me who did the ink on Andre Iguodala? This should be easy to answer as these guys are getting all this exposure.

My man Ryan Henry from the chi

[ZoneSix]

Quote: Originally Posted by MoneyOvaHuds

My man Ryan Henry from the chi

dude from black ink chicago?

[MoneyOvaHuds]

Quote: Originally Posted by ZoneSix

dude from black ink chicago?

Yup yup him

[CujoMatty]

"using information about NBA 2K16 sales, calculated that the value for the eight tattoos should be $572,000"

And in another connected case they are suing EA are and NBA Live because based off of sales they feel the value of the eight tattoos is $7.95.

[Dogslax41]

Enough with the logic that the NBA can be sued or NIKE for having them in commercials. The law states that a persons likeness that is captured for a media and broadcast as is, is not eligible for copyright infringement. Since these tattoos are graphically reproduced then a graphic artist has to go through the process of physically copying the original artists work and reproducing it on another canvas. Take a look at the Kobe and Lebron puppet ads or any other animated ad. Notice their tattoos are nowhere to be found. It's crystal clear why this is an issue and broadcasting basketball games or advertisements are not.

[wallofhate]

The argument that the person was using is that there are products with player likeness DVDs,posters,cereals, etc with the tattoos showing being showed and sold as the cover of nba 2k has. I know what some may say "that's a photo but 2k is computer generated " well for one thing the cover of 2k is a photo a like the others mentioned and if the argument is "the tatts could be cropped or blurred" couldn't that fit for the other forms of media? Even in game the tattoos are generated from dozens of "cameras" taking "photos" for likenes then implemented into the game. If we're going to say games are under the umbrella of media then it she all get the same pass. But wrong and right and what makes sense has nothing to do with or judicial system most of the time lol so 2k will lose