Take-Two Interactive & Visual Concepts Sued By Tattoo Artists

[videlsports]

just cut the tattoos out. seriously I'm not in n mood to hear 2k scaling back any future development for sports titles because of this. I don't blame the artist wanting to get paid for their work, I just don't want to lose any more sports games.( I don't care if I'm overreacting) So just lose the tattoos. Gameplay first

[CujoMatty]

I don't at all understand the "EA is protecting themselves against getting sued" argument. I know most people have forgotten that EA makes a game called NBA live with the same tattoos.

Also I see what the law says but it's a case of common sense vs legal mumbo jumbo IMO. People want the players to replicate their real life counterpart that's it. The same shoes, accessories, hair styles and tattoos. I don't get how anyone with any sense would really genuinly care if a tattoo is being "recreated" on a player in a video game or seeing the tattoo on a player on tv. The only reason I can realistically see is because you think you can get money. It really is a money grab. 1.1 million is fair? Really?

[Poke]

I seen this coming. It was just a matter of time. But really do sports magazines, basketball card companies etc. have to pay too? This is ridiculous. Once a person pays for the art and its on their body it belongs to them. I don't care who designed what. What's next? Are the barbers and hair stylists going to start charging too.

[SpeedyClaxton]

As much as i am fan of basketball and longtime 2k player as well i must admit i wouldn't buy it if they cut it out. Gameplay is always number one but authenticity as well is very high on priority list for me, i don't pay for fake stuff and always target authentic game to buy. That's why i stopped buying PES years ago because they couldn't license teams for their game. They earn each year ridiculous amounts money and they couldn't buy FIFA license for teams, very cheap move and also one that decide me not to buy that stuff anymore. Instead of Arsenal i had 'North London FC' lool..like it was some 3rd party amateur game.

[jake44np]

Quote: Originally Posted by SpeedyClaxton

As much as i am fan of basketball and longtime 2k player as well i must admit i wouldn't buy it if they cut it out. Gameplay is always number one but authenticity as well is very high on priority list for me, i don't pay for fake stuff and always target authentic game to buy. That's why i stopped buying PES years ago because they couldn't license teams for their game. They earn each year ridiculous amounts money and they couldn't buy FIFA license for teams, very cheap move and also one that decide me not to buy that stuff anymore. Instead of Arsenal i had 'North London FC' lool..like it was some 3rd party amateur game.

So you don't play Madden or the Show then?
Because they don't have real tattoos??? LOL
Not having tattoos or real tats on players would make no difference to me.
you cant make them out 99% of the time anyway when you are playing the game.

[Junior Moe]

Quote: Originally Posted by cujomatty

I don't at all understand the "EA is protecting themselves against getting sued" argument. I know most people have forgotten that EA makes a game called NBA live with the same tattoos.

EXACTLY!! EA was sued but NBA Live didn't go tattoo less. I would understand it but they didn't. So what are these guys basing their "get ready to see tattoos gone in 2K" arguments on. This isn't Madden or the NFL.

[Hassan Darkside]

I wonder how feasible generic tattoos are. I'm usually not looking closely enough to notice every intricate detail of each player's tattoo. If Amar'e Stoudemire's bicep tattoo said "Korea is Korean" instead of "Knowing is Knowledge" I probably wouldn't even notice unless someone pointed it out. Might be too much work for the art department though.

[jeremym480]

Quote: Originally Posted by 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.

That's what I'm wondering, as well. Especially, when you consider this:

Quote: Originally Posted by redsox4evur

Some other things to be considered: 1) If the tattoo is non-original it doesn't need to be approved by the tattoo artist. See 17 USC 102 (a). So, if a player has a tribal tattoo that is a reproduction of a tattoo that dates back hundreds of years, the tattoo artist has no IP rights. 2) Does the player own the tattoo IP in the first place? See 17 USC 201(b) Works made for hire. In the case of a work made for hire, the employer or other person for whom the work was prepared is considered the author for purposes of this title, and, unless the parties have expressly agreed otherwise in a written instrument signed by them, owns all of the rights comprised in the copyright.

Just make the ones that they don't have the rights to similar, but not 100% accurate. Kind of like how in MLB The Show they used to put a Dalmatian instead of the Chick Fil A cow at Turner Field. Honestly, I couldn't tell you what particular tattoo any player has in the NBA right now, so just throw something similar on all of the copyrighted tattoos and call it a day.