Tattoo artist Victor Whitmill is suing Warner Bros., saying a facial tattoo in its new movie "The Hangover 2" violates his copyright because the tattoo looks identical to the one he designed for boxer Mike Tyson. Apparently, no court has yet grappled with the question of whether tattoos can be protected by copyright.
The Copyright Act sets out the requirements for copyright protection: you have to have an “original work of authorship,” and it must be “fixed in a tangible medium of expression.” There's not much question that Whitmill's design is an “original work of authorship” — if it were painted on canvas, for instance, there's no doubt that it would receive copyright protection. The harder question is whether Mike Tyson's face is a “tangible medium of expression.”
I don't recognize the face but -- wait for it, snicker, snicker -- the tangible medium of expression is familiar. Sorry, couldn't help myself.
(via hit & run, which earlier this year published a review of the movement to legalize tattooing in modern America: “the tattoo itself, the process of tattooing, and the business of tattooing are forms of pure expression fully protected by the First Amendment.” Good news for my niece the tattoo artist.)
Comments
Hey, I invented the "Mom" tattoo! Honest! Boy, do a lot of guys owe me a lot of money.
Also, that smiley face thing. Mine!
Fork it over, you theives!
Leo, very interesting. Based on my knowledge of copyright, I would say it is protected. Paintings and photos are not 100% tangible mediums of expression. They all fail over time.
The question I have is it the designer who owns the work or is it Mike Tyson who paid to have a design made? If the artist created the design and then marketed it to Tyson for sale, then it would belong to the artist. However, if Mike Tyson contacted the artist and contracted the artist to make a special design, it belongs to Tyson.
Another question I have is did the artist first make a drawing of what he was going to do? My guess he worked from a sketch before they start on skin.
While visiting Boulder, CO a few years ago, I drove by the World's Most Appropriately Named Tattoo Parlor -- wait for it -- "Scarred for Life."
I'm with you, gadfly. I'm an old guy who grew up associating tattoos with military vets and circus geeks.
Now, of course, it's kids getting tattoos - often very large and colorful ones. They may look cool when you're young, slim and attractive. How will they look when those kids are my age and their chests are sagging and those biceps aren't nearly as firm as they used to be?
The big ones are hard to remove. I'm damn glad I never got one.
They look pretty cool on old military vets too. Old sailors with anchor tats rock!