22

weird case with potentially terrible ramifications for tattoo artists

top 7 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] FourteenEyes@hexbear.net 13 points 9 months ago

Dude the picture was taken 35 years ago and the man it depicted has been dead for 33, what exactly do they expect here? Royalties for the fucking tattoo?

[-] viva_la_juche@hexbear.net 13 points 9 months ago

Tf? It’s a tattoo…louie-wtf unless someone is generating a profit off something this kind of shit is absolute nonsense

[-] novibe@lemmy.ml 3 points 9 months ago

I mean, technically there was profit? Like you have to pay to get a tattoo, and they can get expensive. But still, this feels like it goes against even the spirit of the shitty copyright laws, so yeah…

[-] viva_la_juche@hexbear.net 2 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

True, for some reason at the time I assumed they sued the person getting the tat not Kat. But yeah I agree, people have been getting random tattoos of things forever, Miles davis has been dead for ages, everything about this feels like a cash grab. just goofy Af all around

[-] buckykat@hexbear.net 6 points 9 months ago

Death to all copyright holders

[-] EndOfLine@lemm.ee 4 points 9 months ago

Based solely on my reading of the fair use wiki page, I don't think this suit has merit based solely on the "Effects upon work's value" factor to evaluate fair use.

The court not only investigates whether the defendant's specific use of the work has significantly harmed the copyright owner's market, but also whether such uses in general, if widespread, would harm the potential market of the original.

[-] chickentendrils@hexbear.net 5 points 9 months ago

Hopefully it's going nowhere but I haven't seen a fair use defense succeed on this alone.

this post was submitted on 25 Jan 2024
22 points (100.0% liked)

news

23563 readers
582 users here now

Welcome to c/news! Please read the Hexbear Code of Conduct and remember... we're all comrades here.

Rules:

-- PLEASE KEEP POST TITLES INFORMATIVE --

-- Overly editorialized titles, particularly if they link to opinion pieces, may get your post removed. --

-- All posts must include a link to their source. Screenshots are fine IF you include the link in the post body. --

-- If you are citing a twitter post as news please include not just the twitter.com in your links but also nitter.net (or another Nitter instance). There is also a Firefox extension that can redirect Twitter links to a Nitter instance: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/libredirect/ or archive them as you would any other reactionary source using e.g. https://archive.today . Twitter screenshots still need to be sourced or they will be removed --

-- Mass tagging comm moderators across multiple posts like a broken markov chain bot will result in a comm ban--

-- Repeated consecutive posting of reactionary sources, fake news, misleading / outdated news, false alarms over ghoul deaths, and/or shitposts will result in a comm ban.--

-- Neglecting to use content warnings or NSFW when dealing with disturbing content will be removed until in compliance. Users who are consecutively reported due to failing to use content warnings or NSFW tags when commenting on or posting disturbing content will result in the user being banned. --

-- Using April 1st as an excuse to post fake headlines, like the resurrection of Kissinger while he is still fortunately dead, will result in the poster being thrown in the gamer gulag and be sentenced to play and beat trashy mobile games like 'Raid: Shadow Legends' in order to be rehabilitated back into general society. --

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS