5 ms·
> LeBron has some awesome ink. It’s a part of his brand, and so back in 2015, those tattoos were included in the computerized depiction of LeBron created for th
by snacktaster 8y ago
> LeBron has some awesome ink. It’s a part of his brand, and so back in 2015, those tattoos were included in the computerized depiction of LeBron created for the NBA2K video game. [...] Ordinarily that wouldn’t have been a big deal, except that it led to a lawsuit being filed by Solid Oak Sketches, LLC, against the video-game makers, for copyright infringement.
- PakG1 8y agoSo they're supposed to put LeBron in the game with no tattoos or fake different tattoos? If someone had a special haircut, could the hair stylist copyright the haircut? If someone had a special makeup job, could the makeup artist copyright the makeup job? I don't see how this makes sense. I can understand a design being copyrighted, but once it's applied and inseparable from a person, the copyright can still apply? edit: So nobody would be able to take photos to make posters, coffee mugs, etc, if the subject has any copyrighted design implemented on their body, unless they pay a licensing fee to the copyright holder?
- rcMgD2BwE72F 8y agohttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_panorama https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_panorama
- dvfjsdhgfv 8y agoTaking photos is one thing. Distributing these for profit is another - you need to obey several laws, including copyright law and various privacy laws.
- paranoidrobot 8y ago> If someone had a special haircut, could the hair stylist copyright the haircut? I imagine this would hinge on whether hair can be considered a tangible medium. > If someone had a special makeup job, could the makeup artist copyright the makeup job? I see this as the same issue as tattoos - even though makeup is generally considered a temporary thing, that doesn't minimise the copyright applicability - assuming that skin is considered a tangible medium. Similar body issues: Piercings, studs, etc where the overall arrangement and application may be considered a unique work of art. I'd be interested to know if the absence/removal of something would constitute a work of art being recorded in a tangible medium - i.e a particularly unique style of hair plucking (eyebrows, say).
- seanalltogether 8y agoIt's also important to note that fashion design is not eligible for copyright protection, despite the fact that a logo placed on a shirt is eligible. Would a hairstyle or makeup be considered as a product design, or a logo design?
- briffle 8y agoI'm curious how this applies to televising games. At the start of many televised games, they mention their copyright disclaimer that rebroadcasting or recording without consent is prohibited.. While I don't want this case to succeed because of what it will mean for the industry, its pretty hilarious to see the media and giant corporations that all hide behind copyright getting sued for infringement, and arguing fair use, etc..
- jbattle 8y ago> So they're supposed to put LeBron in the game with no tattoos or fake different tattoos? I assume the company claiming copyright ownership just wants $$
- PakG1 8y agoWell, of course. What I'm wondering is what's the logically defensible legal defense argument?
- imh 8y agoThere are two distinct questions at play. One is whether the tattoos are copyrightable. The second is what counts as fair use if the tattoos are copyrightable. Even if they decide tattoos are copyrightable, there might still be a ton of fair use categories to be decided on a case by case basis. I'd imagine that even if copyright applies to any of your examples, fair use is probably super broad in them.
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]