Commercial Photography & Models With Tattoo's

[dcbear78]

Here is where Australia's copyright systems actually works well. The creator does not automatically retain copyright here. The customer does and it needs to be assigned back with a contract. Which is of course done by photographers but not tattoo artists (maybe some rare cases). So this whole issue is mostly avoided here.

 

[Mashburn]

I'm just thinking what's it stop an artist from sueing us wedding photographers?

Sent from my XT1650 using ThePhotoForum.com mobile app

 

[smoke665]

I'm just thinking what's it stop an artist from sueing us wedding photographers?

Just so you know there is nothing you can do that will prevent you from ever being sued, when you go into business, the chances go up significantly. Had a Business Law Professor who later became my personal attorney, tell me once that in court it's not what you can say but what you can prove, and written trumps verbal every time.

 

[jeffW]

... stick to the subject, eh? Tattoos and copyright - will this affect your photography, aye or nay?

I just photographed a model with prominent tattoos on her back shoulder blades, her comp card doesn't refer to the tattoos at all and I'm lucky because I had nothing to do with the selection of talent.

In my opinion all the images of her with the outfit showing the tattoos can't be used. Not because of copyright but because they completely change the communication of the picture. I've watched art directors remove talent from scenes for a lot less. This model has basically ended her career in commercial modeling until she magically becomes famous.

Its naive to think that a national fashion magazine isn't aware of each little element in a picture to allow a tattoo slip by. Or that ADs aren't aware, before a light stand gets put up, that additional costs such as high end retouching will eat into their budget and therefore won't even choose that talent in the first place.

 

[thereyougo!]

he man who gave Mike Tyson his distinctive facial tattoo has
sued Warner Bros. over the similar-looking facial art on Ed Helms' character in the upcoming The Hangover: Part II.

So what will happen, Can a photographer take a picture of a model in the nude with her custom tattoo's showing in the picture with out the dangers of being taken to civil court?
as i said time will tell, and this may change the way commercial photography with models who have tattoo's forever..

The thing that the courts should rule against is any more parts to the Hangover series. I thought that the first film was utterly lame, and about as funny as having your arms cut off with a rusty nail.

 

[Madison6D]

Everyone choose the best photographer for their commercial photography and also model photography. You find online for a good photographer.....also you can see their online reviews.

 

[donny1963]

Okay, folks, why don't we stick to the subject, eh? Tattoos and copyright - will this affect your photography, aye or nay?

The tattoo artist owns the image, even though he may have sold it many times, and people are not free to copy the image to make another tattoo without permission.

However;

If a photographer takes a photo of a person with a tattoo, the photo becomes the intellectual property of the photographer. Any visible tattoos are simply a part of the subject, similar to the clothing or jewelry he or she is wearing.

Precedent has been established in the design of a building. The architect owns the image which no-one can copy to build another exactly the same, but the building can be photographed by anyone.

So if I were to photograph Mike Tyson, I would not try to cover up his famous tattoo, because that is how he looks.

Not true, if a girl has a tattoo on her chest or back, and she does lets say for argument sake a nude shoot, and the tattoo is on her back and the photographer takes a picture of the model and the tattoo is in clear view, the intellectual property of the model does belong to the photographer but not the artwork on the models back and therefor the

photographer must get permission to publish this picture in any way including posting it on social media like Facebook, the photographer MUST get permission from the tattoo artist who owns that art work regardless, because that is re-producing this art work,

doesn't mater if it's re-produced by making another tattoo of that art work or copying in on digital media, the copyrights are quite clear, you can not re-copy, re-produce any artwork that is under copyright laws in part or the entire artwork.

just like a song if you are doing a video and the song Stairway to Heaven is paying in the background and is clearly recorded in that video,
you can not publish that video with that song playing in the background, you MUST get permission for that by the author or who owns the copyright..

I know this, because i was watching an interview with Quentin Tarantino, and how he stated he had a song playing in the background in a scene off the radio it was suppose to be background music, and had to pay for the use of that song even tho the entire song was not played, it was only 1 or 2 minutes of that song, he still had to compensate the copyright holder of that song,,

Just like the Song "happy Birthday" if you make a movie and one scene where a family is having a birthday party for some one lest say and starts to sing happy birthday in the move, company producing the move must pay the copyright holder to have that in their movie..

right now warner /chappell music owns happy brithday song, it use to be owned by the summy company, which registered a copyright in 1935, crediting authors Preston Ware Orem and Mrs. R.R. Forman who originally created that song..

Any artwork that an artist creates is considered copyright upon creation, like a photographer's work is copyrighted the minute the shutter was released and captured such art work.. the same goes with lyrics, the minute the author wrote his / her poem or song, it became implied copyright the minuted it was created or written.. The same Goes with Tattoo's it's no different, it don't just apply to re-producing it as a tattoo..

And you can't take the art work of a tattoo off someone and then re-print it on another person in a picture or animated figure either, ask mike tyson, because the artist won out of court ..

the movie company who did that settled out of court and paid the tattoo artist for that..

Same goes with Taking a picture of it, So that is why i say be careful to any one who gets a tattoo who does modeling or any type of work where your tattoo owned by some one else is on your body can can be visible in any print or video,

because that could cause problems to who ever is trying to publish your talent and capture it and if the tattoo is present in such work you not only have to pay the person / model / actor /actress for their talent but also the tattoo artist that is on their body visible..

They have been many civil cases like this where a model's work was published, and the tattoo artist saw that and then took the publishing company to court for having their artwork in their published work.. You can not simply use any one's artwork in your own artwork and disregard their rights and claim to compensation for it..

 

[donny1963]

Teyana Taylor performer, and who is also a musician, had a picture of her in a bikini published, the problem was.
The Tattoo of the Rolling Stones Logo was present on her ass, and , yes a big law suit broke out..

John Pasche is the man who created the artwork of the logo for the rolling stones back in 1969,
of course the rolling stone bought the rights to it..
Of course the publishing company had to settle for that picture..

In addition, the rolling stones took the tattoo artist to court for re-producing the rolling stones logo for a fee.
So to you tattoo artist out there putting tattoos of the Apple logo from apple computer, or using Harley Davidson, or IBM or Microsoft.
Or any company logo, watch out, because you can end up in tons of trouble for using that art work, it's not yours, and you have
no right to tattoo on it on people for free or a fee..

12 Celebrity Butt Tattoos | Steal Her Style

Please do not post pictures to which you do not own rights. You may post a link.

 

[Designer]

doesn't mater if it's re-produced by making another tattoo of that art work or copying in on digital media, the copyrights are quite clear, you can not re-copy, re-produce any artwork that is under copyright laws in part or the entire artwork.

Can you cite the reference?

 

[donny1963]

doesn't mater if it's re-produced by making another tattoo of that art work or copying in on digital media, the copyrights are quite clear, you can not re-copy, re-produce any artwork that is under copyright laws in part or the entire artwork.

Can you cite the reference?

you want me to site the copyright laws?? go read them they are all over the internet , it's not my job to prove any laws to you, if you don't want to
accept them as true then go research them yourself lol
i just stated what i researched on my own. don't take my word for it if you don't want too.
go and photograph a model with a tattoo and publish it and then find out the hard way lol

 

[Designer]

doesn't mater if it's re-produced by making another tattoo of that art work or copying in on digital media, the copyrights are quite clear, you can not re-copy, re-produce any artwork that is under copyright laws in part or the entire artwork.

Can you cite the reference?

you want me to site the copyright laws??

Asking someone to provide proof of something he just claimed is entirely within the scope of natural internet behavior. It happens with regularity, and most people are happy to provide their sources, if for no other reason than to bolster their arguments.

 

[john.margetts]

doesn't mater if it's re-produced by making another tattoo of that art work or copying in on digital media, the copyrights are quite clear, you can not re-copy, re-produce any artwork that is under copyright laws in part or the entire artwork.

Can you cite the reference?

I don't know where you are based, but under EU copyright law, you can include copyright material if it appears incidentally rather than as the subject of the photographer. Otherwise, it would be next to impossible to photograph in a town street.

Sent from my A1-840 using Tapatalk

 

[donny1963]

doesn't mater if it's re-produced by making another tattoo of that art work or copying in on digital media, the copyrights are quite clear, you can not re-copy, re-produce any artwork that is under copyright laws in part or the entire artwork.

Can you cite the reference?

I don't know where you are based, but under EU copyright law, you can include copyright material if it appears incidentally rather than as the subject of the photographer. Otherwise, it would be next to impossible to photograph in a town street.

Sent from my A1-840 using Tapatalk

Not with something like this, if your a photographer or in the business, this is something you should probably be aware of or have some insight on..

 

[donny1963]

doesn't mater if it's re-produced by making another tattoo of that art work or copying in on digital media, the copyrights are quite clear, you can not re-copy, re-produce any artwork that is under copyright laws in part or the entire artwork.

Can you cite the reference?

I don't know where you are based, but under EU copyright law, you can include copyright material if it appears incidentally rather than as the subject of the photographer. Otherwise, it would be next to impossible to photograph in a town street.

Sent from my A1-840 using Tapatalk

doesn't matter really where you are unless your living in IRAN or some 3rd world country that doesn't recognize Copyright Treaty.
The World Intellectual Property Organization Copyright Treaty (WIPO Copyright Treaty or WCT) is an international treaty on copyright law adopted by the member states of the world intellectual property organization (WIPO)

WIPO Copyright Treaty - Wikipedia


which means YOUR EU Laws don't matter, if your are breaking copyright laws of property of something that was created in most parts of the world.
Including the United States, your in violation, and can be held accountable..

So if you are in violation of any copyright laws of intellectual Property Owned by some one in the United States you can still be accountable even tho your in EU.. You can't hide simply because your thousands of miles away..

If that wasn't so, then people in England or France or Germany, could re-produce music and movies created in the united states and owned in the united sates, and then profit from them...

I mean that's obvious isn't it?


And it doesn't matter if the artwork is not the focus of the subject it's still in the art work,
Just like i said if your recording a video or making a movie and in a specific scene there is a radio playing music and lets say The Led Zeppelin song, stairway to heaven,

Then you can not print that scene and publish it as part of the movie unless you got Expressed permission, or signed a deal with the copyright holder of that song, it still simply can not be re-produced in the background or foreground as a focus of the content.. So just because your taking a picture of a model with a bikini on and modeling Sun Tan Lotion for a

commercial shoot, and a tattoo is clearly in view in that picture, this is a violation of copyright laws infringing on the tattoo artist who created that art work, doesn't matter if that is not the reason the photo was taken it still re-printed..

there is no excuses or loophole, or rationalizing, you just simply cannot do it..

 

[john.margetts]

So I take a photograph in Lincoln High Street and there is someone in the street with a tattoo, I cannot use that photo? Nonsense. That would make outdoors photography completely impossible.

Sent from my A1-840 using Tapatalk