Take-Two Interactive & Visual Concepts Sued By Tattoo Artists

[WISports]

Quote: Originally Posted by 24ct

I don't understand why ppl think it's ridiculous for the tattoo artists to be suing over their property. It's their work. Sometimes they're custom drawing stuff. It's actual physical property. Not the players body but the artwork is. Nothing ridiculous about them suing imo. I'm not a lawyer but it's pretty clear this is copyright infringement to some degree.

I own my own tattoo parlor. And I can honestly say, I wouldn't care one bit.

What is it hurting? If anything, it's getting your work out in the public eye (big time).

[jfsolo]

Those of you who really care about this sort of thing should prepare yourself mentally for the very real possibility that most tats will be gone next year. A few diehards may not buy the game because of this, but most people will be like, "well that sucks" and then just keep playing the game.

[ksuttonjr76]

Just for the sake of clarification, the other suits were settled out of court. Meaning that the companies didn't want to mess with it or risk losing/bad press. Settling is not the same as losing....

EA merely settled then made it so they couldn't be sued in the future. Now, 2K Sports has to make the same decision whether to fight it or settle.

[JohnDoe8865]

Could 2K hypothetically use the scanned tattoos and then slightly alter them on the artist side so that they aren't then using the copyrighted IPs?

Would that be a realistic workaround, if they decide not to pay? Otherwise, I guess PC gamers can edit them back in.

[24ct]

Quote: Originally Posted by WISports

I own my own tattoo parlor. And I can honestly say, I wouldn't care one bit. What is it hurting? If anything, it's getting your work out in the public eye (big time).

Thanks for the input. I'm sure it's different for every artist. Like not all the players tattoo artists are suing. Just a select few so it just depends on the artist. I get what you're saying tho. I think it's fine some artists don't like it tho. Well I just understand really.

[24ct]

Quote: Originally Posted by ksuttonjr76

In my mind, it's not the artist's property. The artist wasn't the sole creator of the tattoo, because he would have gotten input from the customer/player. Music is non debatable who created the music. It's not debatable who writes a play, novel, short story, etc. It's not debatable who creates a fashion line. To me, you would have to convince me that tattoo artist truly "owns" the tattoo before I can consider it a copyright infringement. I look at tattoo artists as providing a service in the realm of haircuts, make up, fingernails, landscaping, painting buildings, interior decorating, etc. Basically, if you need input from the customer to create it, then to me you can't "own" copyrights to the end product.

True. And to add to that if an artist buys a beat from a beat maker with a sample it's the artists responsibility to get it cleared. So I get what you're saying. But if someone gives me an idea for a drawing and I paint it, I would consider that mine. It goes from intellectual property to actual physical evidence.

Again I'm not a lawyer and don't really know what I'm talking about lol but it just makes sense to me. Once you pen something it's more proof of it being yours. Unless the player in question drew the picture himself. I think that's a different case. But when it comes to someone providing an idea and someone else making it real, it just seems it would be more of the creators ownership than the idealists.

[swac07]

-singing in my best O'jays impersonation- "for the loooooooove of moooooooneeeeeeey...." smh

[BellSKA]

Quote: Originally Posted by coolcras7

You do realize that people are jerks and will try to take advantage of this situation, we will be the ones who loses. Can you imagine like MSG, EA/2K buying the rights to Tattoos and it's only available on one of the games.

This basic idea is what I immediately thought of when I read this story. While we all feel like we are paying more/ getting less; what do you think will happen if Take2 and 2K lose any sort of revenue from this?

The idea that 2K has the vault of stored money and can easily take care of this situation may not be that far fetched. Do understand where that money originally came from. They will try and recoup that from the customer before they ask for more money from sponsors.

If you think the VC payout now is a mere pittance, just wait till they squeeze the consumer to purchase VC just to stay competitive.