Take-Two Interactive & Visual Concepts Sued By Tattoo Artists

[MoneyOvaHuds]

Re: Makers of NBA2K sued for using players' tattoos without permission

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

[downsouth]

Re: Take-Two Interactive & Visual Concepts Sued By Tattoo Artists

Athletes will simply get waivers in the future or charge for artists to tat them. I could tat LBJ and it would be worth more than an Ed Hardy original tat on Mo Williams.

Sent from my P01M using Tapatalk

[jake44np]

Re: Take-Two Interactive & Visual Concepts Sued By Tattoo Artists

Its a total money grab, the tat artist will settle out of court for a fraction of what they are sueing for. Just like the guy who sued UFC's game, see below.

This is not the first time a tattoo artist has sued a video-game maker for using his work on an athlete without permission. Tattoo artist Victor Escobedo was awarded $22,500 for his lion tattoo that was portrayed on UFC fighter Carlos Condit without his permission in THQ's "UFC Undisputed" game. Escobedo had originally asked for $4.1 million.

[King_B_Mack]

Re: Take-Two Interactive & Visual Concepts Sued By Tattoo Artists

I find it hilarious that one of the tattoos cited is a child portrait on LeBron's arm. How you gonna claim a copyright on someone else's face? I'm assuming it's one of LeBron's kids he had tattooed on his body, so for some random *** company to somehow "got" the rights to these tattoos last year and file a lawsuit looking for damages that includes numbers from before they "got" the rights is pretty ridiculous imo.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[ballin2k0]

they should get sued but for their vc and mt tactics...because of your pay to win bs on myteam you will never have anything because of this and in domination you use to be able to build a team through that now all you get is the lowest silver player every time....im done after this year i can only imagine its going to get worse because it does every year they find ways to cutt vc payouts mt is impossible to get...with contracts and shoes to take everything that you could of had...its disgusting and i will no longer support it

[ballin2k0]

oh yea on gaunlet,,,every item has become injury cards and contracts so i geuss ill quit playing that beause after a chore fest 30 min game it really gets to you when all you get is 2 injury cards and a contract fn bs

[anthonyf105]

This tattoo stuff is all crazy. When a person gets a tattoo, they pay the artist for it so it's no longer their property due to the transaction for the work of art. It'd be no different if LeBron was playing with the Mona Lisa he payed for strapped to his back. Smh

[downsouth]

Re: Makers of NBA2K sued for using players' tattoos without permission

Damn! I love NBA2K but right is right. Should have just paid the 1.1 and got their license and permission.

Why? Now they will settle for pennies on the dollar.

[Junior Moe]

Re: Makers of NBA2K sued for using players' tattoos without permission

Why? Now they will settle for pennies on the dollar.

That was me speaking as if everything is on the up and up. The way I understand it is that 2K knew these guys had the rights and put the tats in question in game anyway without their permission. In that case, right is right and 2K should pay them. Now if this is just a money grab and 2K settles for a fraction of that then that's cool, too. But I'm no lawyer. What worries me somewhat is how all this will affect player tats next year and beyond.

[Hooe]

Re: Take-Two Interactive & Visual Concepts Sued By Tattoo Artists

This tattoo stuff is all crazy. When a person gets a tattoo, they pay the artist for it so it's no longer their property due to the transaction for the work of art. It'd be no different if LeBron was playing with the Mona Lisa he payed for strapped to his back. Smh

This is absolutely not true. The artist owns his work and intellectual property then sells copies of it.

When 2K Sports sells you a copy of NBA 2K - an original product produced by their company, no different than a piece of art produced an artist - you the consumer don't suddenly own the intellectual property of NBA 2K. You own the disc which holds the software, you may play that software on your game console, and you may re-sell your copy, but you don't have the right to mass-produce the game and sell it as your own original work.

[downsouth]

Re: Makers of NBA2K sued for using players' tattoos without permission

That was me speaking as if everything is on the up and up. The way I understand it is that 2K knew these guys had the rights and put the tats in question in game anyway without their permission. In that case, right is right and 2K should pay them. Now if this is just a money grab and 2K settles for a fraction of that then that's cool, too. But I'm no lawyer. What worries me somewhat is how all this will affect player tats next year and beyond.

Its the way it works. Like the old apologizing is easier than asking permission.

Sent from my P01M using Tapatalk

[anthonyf105]

This is absolutely not true. The artist owns his work and intellectual property then sells copies of it.

When 2K Sports sells you a copy of NBA 2K - an original product produced by their company, no different than a piece of art produced an artist - you the consumer don't suddenly own the intellectual property of NBA 2K. You own the disc which holds the software, you may play that software on your game console, and you may re-sell your copy, but you don't have the right to mass-produce the game and sell it as your own original work.

A 2K artist created that tattoo on that virtual arm, the original artist didn't create it. Unless there's a contract between the players and tattoo artist for that likeness and image, I don't know how this is still the artist' property.