Re: Take-Two Interactive & Visual Concepts Sued By Tattoo Artists
Agreed. I wasn't necessarily comparing the tattoos work with the NCAA students. I'm just saying suing for likeness rights/recreation is feasible. Just like a sample record. Even if I don't make a penny off the song I make, if someone comes and samples it then makes money, I can sue. As long as it's within the statue of limitations which is like 50+ years lol. This is basically what the players did with the NCAA games. I agree with your point as far as them not getting paid so it's different in that regard. I should've made that a clear thought.
As for the tattoos, it's all the discretion of the artist. We don't know what they're having players/celebrities sign or do when they get work done. Each shop/artist has their own policy. It could be on the walls of the parlor or in the tattoo books. Like I said I have a bunch of tattoos. And there was an artist who wouldn't do the same work on 2 different people. Like if you saw something you liked on someone else, he wouldn't copy it or redraw for you to have on your own skin. He also didn't copy the tattoo I gave him from online verbatim. He didn't really want to do it. He was glad I had a big enough picture so he didn't have to redraw it then trace it but the finished product was his own creation/twist. If this studio is doing big names like LeBron & Kobe I'm sure they have a policy written somewhere.
I actually know of the guy who has done some of LeBrons tattoos. The place is in Cleveland. He's done work on Mo Williams too. I'm from Ohio & my friend gets his tattoos from the same guy. You can tell by the shading/filling he does. The artist I said wouldn't redraw tattoos worked in the same studio as the guy who did LeBrons, Mo's & my friends. I don't think it's the same company that's suing take two tho. So either they got permission or they're not that strict.
Guys name is Jimmy. Works at Focused parlor. But they're not suing. Also the article says it's about the 2k where LeBron was on the cover. Says the tattoo was a focal point of sales. Which isn't true of course lol but by law/default it makes sense. Especially if the guy in question was on the cover of the game. Legit case here from that standpoint.
Agreed. I wasn't necessarily comparing the tattoos work with the NCAA students. I'm just saying suing for likeness rights/recreation is feasible. Just like a sample record. Even if I don't make a penny off the song I make, if someone comes and samples it then makes money, I can sue. As long as it's within the statue of limitations which is like 50+ years lol. This is basically what the players did with the NCAA games. I agree with your point as far as them not getting paid so it's different in that regard. I should've made that a clear thought.
As for the tattoos, it's all the discretion of the artist. We don't know what they're having players/celebrities sign or do when they get work done. Each shop/artist has their own policy. It could be on the walls of the parlor or in the tattoo books. Like I said I have a bunch of tattoos. And there was an artist who wouldn't do the same work on 2 different people. Like if you saw something you liked on someone else, he wouldn't copy it or redraw for you to have on your own skin. He also didn't copy the tattoo I gave him from online verbatim. He didn't really want to do it. He was glad I had a big enough picture so he didn't have to redraw it then trace it but the finished product was his own creation/twist. If this studio is doing big names like LeBron & Kobe I'm sure they have a policy written somewhere.
I actually know of the guy who has done some of LeBrons tattoos. The place is in Cleveland. He's done work on Mo Williams too. I'm from Ohio & my friend gets his tattoos from the same guy. You can tell by the shading/filling he does. The artist I said wouldn't redraw tattoos worked in the same studio as the guy who did LeBrons, Mo's & my friends. I don't think it's the same company that's suing take two tho. So either they got permission or they're not that strict.
Guys name is Jimmy. Works at Focused parlor. But they're not suing. Also the article says it's about the 2k where LeBron was on the cover. Says the tattoo was a focal point of sales. Which isn't true of course lol but by law/default it makes sense. Especially if the guy in question was on the cover of the game. Legit case here from that standpoint.
Comment