MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: The next nightmare comes true. Release needed for tatoo  (Read 16736 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

EmberMike

« Reply #75 on: April 17, 2014, 12:50 »
+1
So if I tell the artist what I want done, I tell him I want a tribal with a radioactive sign and he draws it for me, and I pay him for it, its his copyright?

Yes. It may be your idea, but it's his copyright when he puts it in a fixed medium like a tattoo.


Shelma1

« Reply #76 on: April 17, 2014, 12:58 »
+2

lisafx

« Reply #77 on: April 17, 2014, 13:07 »
0
Here's an actual legal paper related to exactly this topic, lightly covering implied license, fair use, etc.

http://coatsandbennett.com/images/pdf/the-copyright-implications-of-tattoos.pdf


Very thorough and useful article.  It clearly explains that the tattoos are copyrightable by whoever designed them.  As a practical matter, because they are on someone else's body, presumably forever, it would be wise to get a transfer of ownership from the artist if you plan to be tattooed. 

Ron

« Reply #78 on: April 17, 2014, 13:16 »
+2
So if I tell the artist what I want done, I tell him I want a tribal with a radioactive sign and he draws it for me, and I pay him for it, its his copyright?

Yes. It may be your idea, but it's his copyright when he puts it in a fixed medium like a tattoo.
Ok, thanks for taking the time explaining it to me in a decent way.

« Reply #79 on: April 17, 2014, 14:37 »
+2
This isn't really new. We can't use Graffiti either, now tell me some little criminal tagger with cans of spray paint has the rights and protection, to their art work. What's better is I'd love to see them in court, and then have them tossed for a few years or have to pay for damages for their "art".   :)

Copyright law, typically*,  is neutral with respect to how the work came into existence. And that makes perfect sense since how the work came into existence is irrelevant with respect to the issue of copyright.

*Eg in the US.

If Banksy does your garden wall one night, then your garden wall is going to massively increase in value. You will own the artwork, he will own the copyright.

« Reply #80 on: April 17, 2014, 14:44 »
0
It wouldn't be any different than a picture in a frame.  You'd need a PR.

Sean, I assume you are responding to my earlier question.

But what if we use fabric as backdrop? I know I will need a PR using the framed photo analogy. But what about those printed fabric worn by model?

Sorry for I know this is slightly off topic, I could start a new thread.

« Reply #81 on: April 17, 2014, 14:53 »
+1
I don't use any noticeable printed pattern on models so I don't have to worry about it.

Yes, you wouldn't be able to use a printed backdrop unless it's your own image.  For example, I have a friend who designs and sells backdrops:
http://www.thekandishoppedrops.com/index2.php#/gallery1/3/

« Reply #82 on: April 17, 2014, 14:59 »
0
.
« Last Edit: May 11, 2014, 21:55 by tickstock »

Uncle Pete

« Reply #83 on: April 17, 2014, 21:56 »
+1
Absolutely correct. That's the point. The artist retains rights, even when producing the work, under illegal circumstances.

I like Lisa's idea also. Get the rights to your own Tat on your body.  :)


This isn't really new. We can't use Graffiti either, now tell me some little criminal tagger with cans of spray paint has the rights and protection, to their art work. What's better is I'd love to see them in court, and then have them tossed for a few years or have to pay for damages for their "art".   :)

Copyright law, typically*,  is neutral with respect to how the work came into existence. And that makes perfect sense since how the work came into existence is irrelevant with respect to the issue of copyright.

*Eg in the US.

If Banksy does your garden wall one night, then your garden wall is going to massively increase in value. You will own the artwork, he will own the copyright.

PZF

« Reply #84 on: April 18, 2014, 01:58 »
+2
I recently came across a dead sheep in a field - it had been savaged and killed by wolves - an increasing problem round here. Fairly generic dead sheep, green field, no buildings, nothing special. And FT wanted a property release!!!

« Reply #85 on: April 18, 2014, 04:49 »
-4
I recently came across a dead sheep in a field - it had been savaged and killed by wolves - an increasing problem round here. Fairly generic dead sheep, green field, no buildings, nothing special. And FT wanted a property release!!!


yes, you would need a property release. Not for the sheep, but for the property the sheep was on. That has pretty much always been required. Most times the agencies are sticklers about that...sometimes, in the past, stuff got through with no property release required. I imagine as time goes on, they will want to cover their a$$ more and more.
« Last Edit: April 18, 2014, 04:52 by cathyslife stockphotos.com »

« Reply #86 on: April 18, 2014, 07:11 »
+9
I recently came across a dead sheep in a field - it had been savaged and killed by wolves - an increasing problem round here. Fairly generic dead sheep, green field, no buildings, nothing special. And FT wanted a property release!!!
yes, you would need a property release. Not for the sheep, but for the property the sheep was on. That has pretty much always been required. Most times the agencies are sticklers about that...sometimes, in the past, stuff got through with no property release required. I imagine as time goes on, they will want to cover their a$$ more and more.

That's different.  A property release is really for creative content, but agencies use them to prove you had permission to be on a property.  And a random field isn't going to incur the wrath of anyone, so that's kind of silly.

EmberMike

« Reply #87 on: April 18, 2014, 10:27 »
+1
...As a practical matter, because they are on someone else's body, presumably forever, it would be wise to get a transfer of ownership from the artist if you plan to be tattooed.

I guess this should be something models should know, or be informed of. Really I'd think this should come up in conversation with the tattoo artist. You're sitting there sometimes for hours at a time, sometimes for multiple sessions. I'm sure the fact that someone is a model or public figure (actor, athlete, etc) would come up in conversation. It seems sort of irresponsible if a tattoo artist knows their client is a model and says nothing about the legalities of the tattoo design and copyright.

I've heard the NFL advises all players to get releases for their tattoos. I guess it's just another thing photographers have to deal with, too, advising your models to get releases. Or in the case of a shoot for stock, you almost might as well not even do the shoot without tattoo releases since you have no idea if the tattoo artist will sign.

Uncle Pete

« Reply #88 on: April 18, 2014, 10:40 »
+5
Can the people who voted my comment down explain to me why I am wrong? Honest question, because when its my design, on my skin, why shouldnt I hold copyright? Whats different from Mike having copyright to his design?

Can I really have permission to tell you, or are you just playing the poor misunderstood victim again?

First Negatives are not right or wrong it's opinion. But in fact you are so wrong it's funny, but you won't listen and just keep writing one argument after another that have nothing to do with the facts.

You don't understand but you keep arguing and defending. Then when you finally do shut up and read, after 14 argumentative replies, it's because someone told you nicely?

Oh right, it's always someone's fault but not The Almighty Ron who knows everything.

OK Ron That's Why people gave you a negative. Hope it helps you understand. You asked, I answered.

A Tattoo is a work for hire, therefore its not strange to think the person with the tattoo can sign a PR and MR and it would all hold up in court. Its the same as being a hired photographer and the photos are owned by the customer.

Yeah, thats obvious. I said its not strange to think I didnt say it was definite. But my tattoo on my back is my design and the artist tattooed it. Its unique, and I told what to tattoo, so technically I own the copyright to my own tattoo

I do if I told him what to tattoo.

Its my idea and design, the tattooist just uses a tool to translate it to my skin

If I set up a shot, place the people, dial the settings, and just ask someone to click the shutter, I own copyright to the shot

I agree with you and Paul about that, but if I sign a PR of my tattoo, I have every right to do so. If I sign the PR, shutterstock will accept it, in case the tattoo artist goes after SS, they will show the PR, the artist will come after me, and I will have no issue as I told him what I wanted and paid him to put it on me, so its fully mine. I am will even say this, if the artist chooses to put that tattoo on someone else he could well be copying my design.

Its different because its not work for hire. You take a photo and copy it. In this case the OP has a MR and the agency doesnt accept it. The model, who owns the tattoo, gave permission.

So what if the tattoo artists decides he doesnt want his work to be seen in public, does that mean he can demand me never to take my shirt of ever again when on the beach or in a swimming pool?

I was just asking a new question.

Anyway, it all seems simple to you, but if you search the internet its not so 'basic stuff'.

I dont want to get into a discussion where the one that shouts the loudest is right.

I dont agree with you, lets keep it at that.

I never said the agency cant make their own call, in fact I fully understand why they do it. But its not the law they uphold.

I mean, the agencies dont follow exact law, they are tougher then the law. Same with model releases. Not all images need a MR, but they do ask for it.

Funny fact. I was recently asked by a Dutch agency to remove the model release as it wasnt needed.

But that completely backs up my earlier statements. I told the artist what to tattoo on my back, so I own it.

So if I tell the artist what I want done, I tell him I want a tribal with a radioactive sign and he draws it for me, and I pay him for it, its his copyright?

Ok, thanks for taking the time explaining it to me in a decent way.

« Last Edit: April 18, 2014, 10:48 by Uncle Pete »

Ron

« Reply #89 on: April 18, 2014, 10:50 »
-6
Yeah Pete, I join a discussion and I actually am capable of changing my opinion during a discussion. I actually was waiting for someone to waste time to dig up my comments, because I knew on MSG its not allowed to change your opinion. Once you say something here you need to stick by it until you die. I am not like that. Here is something new for you, outside the forum world its normal to have a discussion and when needed adjust an opinion based on what others might have to say. Thats how it works in my day job as well, where we have meetings and come to agreements. If everyone always would stick to their opinion when they are wrong, there wouldnt be many successful companies in the world.

Anyhoo, I am sure you will pick up a few hearts again, its the only reason you chose to attack me.

Ron

« Reply #90 on: April 18, 2014, 11:06 »
-9
And something else. I am Dutch, live in Ireland, submitting to American agencies. Laws are different everywhere, in the Netherlands they are lenient towards portrait rights, its different in Ireland and in the USA. We dont have a DMCA act, etc. So if I am saying something thats wrong, it might still be right for where I live or where I am from. So in a discussion I am being explained how it works in the USA, is it that weird that I ask questions and picture different scenarios to get an understanding? If you were on a Dutch forum talking to Dutch photographers you would know jack all about our laws. So get off your high horse pretending you know it all.

ethan

« Reply #91 on: April 18, 2014, 14:50 »
+1
Maybe you should add some water to whatever your drinking. Sounding off like a angry little man is not so good.

Peace man :)


Uncle Pete

« Reply #92 on: April 18, 2014, 15:15 »
+11
I see, so your answer to living somewhere else and not knowing the laws was to write 14 replies, the same argument mostly, and disagree with everyone else who does?

Maybe you could think before you post some day?

Typical and expected response from you. Same as the entire thread. Attack people who try to answer or help you, because you know better. Then say you are Dutch and we don't understand you.

When someone points out that you are wrong, or misrepresenting something and you don't listen or take advise, you attack them personally. And finally (thanks for more laughs) "you will pick up a few hearts again, its the only reason you chose to attack me. "

Really? This is all about forum hearts? Holy cow, I thought it was about civilized discussions or information. I didn't attack you, I answered your question.
 
Enjoy watching your hearts count and have a nice long Easter weekend.


And something else. I am Dutch, live in Ireland, submitting to American agencies. Laws are different everywhere, in the Netherlands they are lenient towards portrait rights, its different in Ireland and in the USA. We dont have a DMCA act, etc. So if I am saying something thats wrong, it might still be right for where I live or where I am from. So in a discussion I am being explained how it works in the USA, is it that weird that I ask questions and picture different scenarios to get an understanding? If you were on a Dutch forum talking to Dutch photographers you would know jack all about our laws. So get off your high horse pretending you know it all.

Ron

« Reply #93 on: April 18, 2014, 15:25 »
-4
There is not one attack from me on anyone in this thread. Just read my quotes you dug up.

ruxpriencdiam

    This user is banned.
  • Location. Third stone from the sun
« Reply #94 on: April 18, 2014, 16:21 »
-2
Hey whats up?    8)

Just another day in paradise I see.  8)

It happens no matter what or where.   8)

Soon be beer O'clock around here.  :)  8)

Nothing better to do then just ramble on today as I work away.  8)


Ron

« Reply #95 on: April 18, 2014, 16:25 »
-10
5 more each to bury them. Come on, its Good Friday, I almost feel like Christus when he was crucified. 


Edit: No no no, not this one, the other two !!!!
« Last Edit: April 18, 2014, 16:47 by Ron »

ruxpriencdiam

    This user is banned.
  • Location. Third stone from the sun
« Reply #96 on: April 18, 2014, 16:32 »
-3
Yeah good Friday and so I had fish and left the ribs sitting there till tomorrow and in no time a post I put up gets a vote down sad it is.

Oh well remember tomorrow is Saturday!  8)

And the weekend has arrived for whatever that's worth anyhow?  :)

Ron

« Reply #97 on: April 18, 2014, 16:38 »
+1
Going on my next hike tomorrow. It turns out to be a fantastic way to come up with lots of sellable images and lose weight, 44lbs so far. Really getting into the heart of Wicklow Mountains. This is one of the latest shots, love it how the landscape is lit by the sun, when the rain is pouring down.


« Reply #98 on: April 18, 2014, 18:41 »
0

« Reply #99 on: April 19, 2014, 11:32 »
0
I recently came across a dead sheep in a field - it had been savaged and killed by wolves - an increasing problem round here. Fairly generic dead sheep, green field, no buildings, nothing special. And FT wanted a property release!!!
yes, you would need a property release. Not for the sheep, but for the property the sheep was on. That has pretty much always been required. Most times the agencies are sticklers about that...sometimes, in the past, stuff got through with no property release required. I imagine as time goes on, they will want to cover their a$$ more and more.

That's different.  A property release is really for creative content, but agencies use them to prove you had permission to be on a property.  And a random field isn't going to incur the wrath of anyone, so that's kind of silly.

Of course it's different, and yes, having to prove you had permission to be on a property is why agencies have always asked for them. It has always been silly, especially for the conditions the poster described. I wonder why he/she, and anyone really, is so amazed by them asking for that when it has always been true.
« Last Edit: April 19, 2014, 11:40 by cathyslife stockphotos.com »


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
4 Replies
3288 Views
Last post December 21, 2007, 16:49
by yingyang0
5 Replies
5375 Views
Last post April 08, 2008, 19:01
by snurder
17 Replies
11113 Views
Last post August 17, 2010, 10:48
by Anyka
21 Replies
4558 Views
Last post October 10, 2012, 03:52
by ShadySue
2 Replies
2340 Views
Last post August 21, 2018, 15:02
by ForrestBrown

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors

3100 Posing Cards Bundle