Who Owns Your Tattoo? | Tattoo Artists Answer
Вставка
- Опубліковано 16 чер 2024
- Have you ever wondered who actually owns your tattoo? Is it you or your artist? The Hangover movies tried to settle this in court with Mike Tyson's artist.
What do you think? Who owns your tattoo? Let us know in the comments!
Check out Hell City:
/ hell_city
truetubes?igshi...
Artists in this video:
Kelly Doty: / kellydotylovessoup
Britt Whitman: / brittxwhitman
Jess Brown: / jessbrowntattoos
Sean Gardner: / seangardnerisawesome
Ron Russo: / ron570tattoos
Alexandra Fische: / alexandrafische
Robbie Ripoll: / robbieripoll
Sonya Grenell: / sonyagrenell
Christopher Bettley: / christopherbettley
Mark Longenecker: / marklongenecker
Ryan Eternal: / braddah_eternal
Paul Booth: / paulbooth
Cervena Fox: / cervenafox
Allie Oxenblood: / oxenblood
Steve Irwin: / steve_irwin_tattoo
Dustin Rochowiak: / rochowiaktattoos
Amber Joy: / amberjoytattoo
Kyle Devries: / kyledevriesink
Juan Salgado: / juan_salgado
Nicole Willingham: / nicolewillinghamtattoos
Ryan Willingham: / rwillinghamtattoos
DJ Tambe: / djtambe
Anthony Michaels: / antmikes
Josh Payne: / joshpaynetattoo
Nicole Elisa: / nicoleelisaart
Mike Devries: / mikedevries
Josh Duffy: / josh_duffy
Big Meas: / bigmeas
Killian Moon: / thekillingmoon
Dave Tevenal: / davetattoos
Durb Morrison: / durbmorrison
Lil Van: / van__lovett
Guy Aitchison: / tattooeducation
#Inked #TattooArtistsAnswer #TheHangover
WEBSITE: www.inkedmag.com/
FACEBOOK: / inkedmag
TWITTER: / inkedmag
INSTAGRAM: / inkedmag
My opinion: If the tattoo is a design previously created with no client in mind, then the artist owns it. If the tattoo is designed specifically for a client, then the client owns it.
Good way to think of it! I hadn't thought that
Good point
fair to me. Flash tattoos belong to the artist, period, so give them the royalties. Other than that, if you don't trademark it, it's mine because it's on my body.
I did a rough sketch of my tattoo. I sent it to my artist and told him hey, this is what i want but can you draw it better and tattoo it.
I feel like
1. I made the original design so its mine.
2. I paid him for his work to draw up my sketch and put it on my body
I do not feel like he owns the artwork. Did he do a great job? Hell yes.
Now if I went in and he had a drawing he did (not flash) and wanted to tattoo it on him and I paid him for it. He still owns the image.
@@digslicuanan3225 I have the stencil and the original drawing. 😒 so....the tattoo artist was paid to tattoo. Which he did a hell of a job doing.
My head hurts, every point of view makes sense.
nah man. once you pay for it. it's yours and you can make whaterver you want with it. the only thing you will be morally obligated is to give credit to the artist.
@@LuchianM1 Buying art pretty much never gives you the copyrights. You can do what you want with it, but you can't reproduce it and sell it.
@@guillaumericard1233 We are not talking about paintings here, we are talking about tattoos. If i want to get a tattoo of MY own design on MY body, and pay someone to do it, that design is mine since the tattoo artist had nothing to do with the design. Don't confuse the artwork with the process of tattooing.
@@LuchianM1 But what about the designs that the artist made? Say a client says...do what you want on me. They have no input whatsoever...then who's rights does it belong to? The client had no input and gave the artist full creativity.
@@StudlyFudd13 If you commision a design and a tattoo, you will get that tattoo only on your skin. That tattoo that is on your skin and that you paid for, belongs to you. You pay for the design to be tattooed on you, you don't get the stencil or the design on a piece of paper, you only get it on your skin. If you want to photo the skin and make a Tshirt out of it (Wich will never look as good as if it was drawn on a paper or computer in the first place) it's your prerogative. Once is on your skin, it's yours. Imagine the flipside, what if a tattoo artist says "here is your money back, take down that tattoo because it's mine and i don't want it on your skin anymore". That is stupid right? well, this is a 2 way street.
We ALL own it
*Soviet anthem plays*
I can hum that song now because of these memes :/
So no one owns it
I might actually start choosing my artist, based on their answer to this.
Yeah singe of these people seem like chavs
@@danielbenitez4120 sorry... What?
I have been designing company logos, and the art is mine until the agreed payment is fulfilled. I can't just go back and ask for royalties if they are successful in their business, without a contract that says so. As mentioned in this video 9:39.
The woman who designed the Nike swoosh, she got paid $35 to do it. She doesn’t own it and doesn’t get royalties
@@mightymusc Too bad for her but she has absolutely no legal claim for royalties of that.
Artist that give away their stuff and want everyone else too do it are gross. They are the reason why people go into tattoo shops day in and day out with pictures of someone else tattoo and say, I WANT THIS, DO IT NOW!!"
TheLightGaming I agree✌️
Roy Kampestuen !!!^^^
The puppet threw me for a swing 😂😂
Love how the puppet has ink 😂
@Sandra Quirk 😂
@Sandra Quirk glad I'm not the only one. I thought I was tripping hard
I just could not take it seriously😂
@Sandra Quirk yayy 🖐️🖐️
The boxer that went in in long sleeves to get the photos done 🤣 that's great.
This is down to copyright issues.
You pay a photographer for taking photos, say at a wedding, but you have to buy the copyright separately.
Just like some of them said, if you buy an original painting from an artist, you own that physical painting. You can display it however you want, hell, you could paint over it, smash it, or burn it if you wanted. But it's pretty obvious that you cant then reproduce that painting and make money off of it without the explicit consent of the artist.
But I also appreciate the idea that if the artist wants to use a design for profit/wide distribution that was made *custom* for a client based on a collaboration of the client's and the artist's ideas, the artist should probably reach out to the client to see if they are okay with that.
So if I say pay someone to make me a logo for a UA-cam channel and put it on a shirt am I gonna have to pay the artist for every shirt I sell?
Wouter Schip it’s depends on what agreement you would come to with the artist?
Taylor E that’s not how that works
What if its not an original painting tho? What if you told the artist what you want, what should be in the painting, what colours to use, what if you provided a photo to be roughly converted into a painting? You paid the artist, you got what you asked for it was your idea, could the artist still claim rights to the design? I wouldn't think so. Its like the other commenter said about logos, why would you get cash for designing a logo if you already got paid for it?
Unless artist and client are signing a contract or making an agreement, the design is always exclusively the artists to do with as she/he pleases. If you want your tattoo to be specifically "yours" you need to make that clear to the artist *before* they ink you and have them formally agree to that (ie. they will not reproduce the tattoo or it's likeness). That's the law. That's the answer to this question. It's not a conundrum, it's a bunch of salty people that don't understand copyright law. So: Lay out a written agreement, or shut up about your rights as the client.
This is such a sensitive topic for everyone 🤣🤣💀 love you guys
No, it isn't.
Look at Killian's opinion, that's the most correct in a legal perspective. The other tattoo artist are a bunch of cry babies. Clearly it's yours if it still in the form of a design. But after you attach your design to the body of the person who bought it, it's definitely belongs to the buyer
I remember feeling slightly hurt when I commissioned a tattoo for my back and I saw my artist do a painting of it and I liked it a lot and said hey! I saw you did a painting of the design of my tattoo that’s so cool! Can I buy it? And he said oh sorry I actually painted this as a present for my friend. And I was a little irked because the idea was mine but he wasn’t selling it so I wasn’t that bothered but I felt uncomfortable that he didn’t at least tell me or ask ahead of time. A drawing specifically made for me is now out in the world as a painting and I don’t know who has it where it is or who is going to look at it and maybe want it as a tattoo. Sure it’s my artist’s art, my artist did the painting and the work but it was my idea and he did the original art as my commission and he recreated and distributed it without caring about how I would feel.
Sorry, that sounds very uncomfortable :( I would feel the exact same way!
The fact that there is no straight answer to this question is SO frustrating as a tattoo owner. Killian Moon was the only artist I actually agreed with here.
Why did I look up from ironing my shirt to see a puppet 😂
I am also ironing...
I was wiping my ass
@Vision Tube we all were, my dude.
I was doing the dishes and I'm equally confused
when a tattoo artist does a picture of a celebrity on some one does that mean the celebrity deserve royalties and compensation for the use of their image?
Hell no lol
That’s a much stickier argument. And it can depend on where the tattoo artist got the image they used for reference for the tattoo. Generally you can’t take a copyrighted work (like a painting or photograph) and make your own copy of it and make money off it. And some celebrities have their likeness trademarked.
The original artist though has derivative rights to their piece and that covers alterations in medium.
Technically... the photographer who took the picture owns the rights to the image if they copied an actual existing image. They can do their own based on many references, but if you just draw/paint/tattoo/whatever a portrait from a picture, the photographer owns it.
@@justinsavoie4872 by a lot of their logic they should. I've meet more douchebag tattoo artists over the years than I have met cool ones. They get booked up and start getting a big head and think they are special, reason I left one of my last tattoo artists and he knows it and he wont use my work in his portfolio. Only time he used it was right when it was done and he put it online but as far as his portfolio it's not in there. I paid for a one of a kind piece and it's mine. He tries to make money off of it I guarantee I have better lawyers to put him out of business.
If the artist thinks the design or logo is marketable then they shouldn’t of sold that design or logo. If I’m a car manufacturer and I buy a design for a spark plug off you, you can’t then demand royalties because I used the thing I bought from you. That’s not how it should work. That would be like Cannon demanding compensation from photographers because they used their cameras to take the pictures
Personally I would say that the client owns the tattoo, but not the distribution right. If you buy a painting, you can do whatever you want with it and it's physically yours, but you can't reproduce it and sell those reproductions. You own the product but you don't have the copyrights.
However, I think the real answer would be: it's whatever is the agreement between the artist and the client. One girl in the video said artist basically work on commission, and I don't really see it that way. As an artist I create a piece, and what I sell is the process of putting the piece into the skin, not the piece itself. The design itself is not for sale.
The thing about paintings, logos, and other designs is that they are copyrighted by the artist, company, someone's estate, etc. Tattoos are generally not copyrighted which would make it completely easy for the client to say they created the idea and the artist simply put it on them. At that point, it's just the client's words vs the artist's words and the artist wouldn't have any paperwork to prove that the client didn't come up with it themselves. If you want intellectual property to be solely yours and protected legally, you have to copyright it. That's why you cannot just reproduce a painting you buy. They're still copyrighted by the estate of the artist or the artist themselves. But without a copyright, the client owns the artwork on their body and can do as they wish with it.
I have to agree with Paul Booth, the tattoo/artwork belongs to the client but the artists have the rights to the work so if they monetize from it i.e. putting it on and selling t-shirts then the artist has a right to a percentage of those profits.
However it also comes down to who designed the tattoo, if a client walks in with their own drawn design and the artist just resizes and stencils it on then its more of the clients artwork than the artist.
I goes back to protecting intellectual property, it’s used in countless industries. If I knitted you a sweather of my own knitting pattern, that doesn’t mean you now own the knitting pattern just because I sold you the sweather. Even if I made it personally for you, that pattern is still mine unless we signed a contract saying otherwise.
@@iljaxox526 A tattoo is an artwork commission unless it's something like a flash tattoo. If it was your original idea and you've paid for the tattoo, you own both the physical piece (the tattoo) and the design (your original concept).
An example from my own industry: as a software developer, I'm given the customer's idea of what they want their site or application to do as well as overall design. Using those design documents, I then create their application/site for them using my own code. Once they've paid me, I have 0 rights to anything related to that application. They brought me a concept and paid for me to make it a physical reality. Once I've done that, like paying for a tattoo, it's no longer mine.
Chris Recinos that’s adding depth the question doesn’t have though, if you say you like birds and the artist draws something up that doesn’t mean you own that. You can commission a sweather and even if you tell the person knitting it exactly where to knit what you do not own the pattern for owning the sweather. I’m sorry but no one said it was your original idea, and how deep does that have to be? Because if you just as I said say you like birds it’s barely an idea of what that piece could be. If you say exactly what you want then maybe, but again it’s unclear except for the part where you own the physical tattoo. If you drew it yourself then you own it.
Edit-spelling
@@iljaxox526 I would hope no one is going to get a tattoo by just saying birds. And similar to how companies get logos designed (and own the logos once paying) I fail to see how any tattoo artist owns any of the designs of my tattoos even if I didn't draw them first. Just because you put it to paper or skin doesn't automatically mean you own the design if you didn't design it. That's not your intellectual property, it's mine. It originated in my mind, and I paid you for your skills to convert it to my preferred medium. Of course there will always be grey areas.
Having a technical skill doesn't automatically give you intellectual ownership of whatever you use your skill for, be it writing code, knitting, or tattooing. It varies based on the circumstance surrounding that artwork and there's no blanket one way or the other to cover any of these. In general, imo, tattoos tend to usually be of the commission variety and for commission pieces, once you've paid in full the agreed-upon price, you own the design
Nobody Knows, nope. Nothing belongs “in its entirety” to you unless you contracted it that way. Purchase of something doesn’t give you everything about it. But by all means, try to start selling your own version of Windows 10.
Eh, never really put much thought into it, I refer to my tattoos as mine but will always credit the artists that have done them if someone were to ask
There's a painting of Marilyn Monroe by Andy Warhol at the Museum of Modern Art. Pretend that the painting belongs outright to the museum. The MoMA sells a tshirt of the painting in the gift shop. Who deserves a chunk of the change? Marilyn Monroe, because its her image? No because she is just the subject of the work. Is it Andy Warhol because he painted it? No because he or his estate sold his art. But he does deserve credit as the creator. The MoMA has the right to any monetary gain earned from the painting or its image because they are the owner. If the artwork is then sold again, ownership should transfer to the new owner including the right to any monetary gain as a result of its ownership.
I am the owner of my original tattoos because a) I commissioned them, b) I paid for them, c) I had a hand in the design aspect regarding details, artistic elements, placement etc. and d) because it's on my body and possession is 9/10ths of the law.
tbh it will always be about the contract and what people decided. You might be right in all that you said, OF COURSE, but private contracts can be drafted any way the people involved want. So if Marilyn Monroe was alive and charged Andy Warhol for a percentage of profits he might have with the art, it would be valid. If she did it for free, it's valid. If she 'sold' it for a price and never wanna hear from it again, it's valid. Same goes Warhol>MoMA.
I'd say the client owns it unless it's straight up a flash piece.
I can understand both sides of the argument, so I think the client and the artist should come to an agreement in concern to legal stuff.
It depends on where did the tattoo idea originate. Was it a flash piece designed by the artist? It's theirs and they own it - you just paid for a print of it essentially. Was it your own idea you brought to them to then have drawn up and tattooed? You own that design and you just commissioned them to give it a physical form. To put it simply, whoever came up with the concept owns it.
@@christopherrecinos2988 That's a fair point, but what if it was a combined effort or multiple tattoo artists worked on the same piece? You might get into a grey area.
@@d1l4te43 It'd all come down to who came up with the original design idea, regardless of who worked on it. If you got 2 flash tattoos, the artists own both. If it was your idea and you had 2 artists work on it, you commissioned 2 artists work on different parts of your tattoo but you still own the design if that makes sense
@@christopherrecinos2988 Yeah that makes sense. I guess I wasn't thinking about it from a commissioner stand point. To get back to my first comment though I think the artist and the client should work that part out. Some artists may not care and some clients may not care. If your intentions are to sell the same artwork afterwards then you should definitely sign some paperwork with detailed descriptions on how the piece was designed. Idk I'm not a lawyer
But they keep referring to it as Mike Tyson's tattoo. It's recognized by the canvas.
Foreal. Super basic tattoo, made iconic by the guy who has it on his face. Put that same shit on some random guy's arm, it would have been covered up after 10 years. It's Mike Tyson, his personnality and the placement that make it iconic.
I wonder if the artist ever thanked Mike for the free publicity and exposure? The same can be asked for any other artist with celebrity clients
Sure, that's how it's recognized. Doesn't mean he owns the rights to it. The tattoo is on his body, and that tattoo he has, he owns. He does not own the design of the tattoo, he did not draw it, he did not create it.
@@williamrutherford553 imagine saying you own the rights to such a basic, common looking tribal tattoo. looks like something youd rip of google images after 2 seconds of searching anyway, the one in the hangover is a parody of the art anyway which comes under fair use
Under UK Law: "the artist generally owns the copyright in work commissioned by a third party, unless they have signed an agreement to the contrary." However "A commissioner might have an implied licence to use the work"
I think its just a case of getting a contract clear beforehand.
I have waited so long to see @KillianMoon here! Yay! Super proud. Honestly Love his work as a tattoo artist.
Immediately googled pictures of Lil Van
Got to the bottom of that right quick
Shawn Toole I can’t find this guy anywhere😂😂
It's the Clients.
If the Tattoo artist thinks your their billboard than they should PAY YOU for getting a Tattoo.
Otherwise any Tattoo Artist who has tatted a Barbwire/Tribal Band, Comic/Movie/Videogame character owes money to the rightful owners by their own logic.
Literally nothing you buy gives you the rights to the designs unless it's specified. Nothing. Paintings, every day objects, things with logos on them, clothes, furniture, art, NOTHING. Tattoos are not different.
The only way the thing you buy gives you the rights to the design is if you specifically asked to buy the rights to a design for commercial use.
@@guillaumericard1233 Thank you for your input but I don't think you addressed the entirety of my post.
"If the Tattoo artist thinks your their billboard than they should PAY YOU for getting a Tattoo"
I do agree that people should get paid for their work. However if you are a bill board for advertisement of their skill and work then they should pay you. Should they not? That is something companies literally do (Paying for adspace on somebodies skin that is tattooed on them if requested by the person getting a tattoo)
"Otherwise any Tattoo Artist who has tatted a Barbwire/Tribal Band, Comic/Movie/Videogame character owes money to the rightful owners by their own logic."
So if the person who is doing the tattoo is using an already made design (Few examples listed above) then how come they do not have to pay DC/Marvel Comics, New Line Cinema, ETC. If they are using an already established character without the source's (Companies) permission? Because as you said "Literally nothing you buy gives you the rights to the designs unless it's specified. Nothing. Paintings, every day objects, things with logos on them, clothes, furniture, art, NOTHING. Tattoos are not different." So why do tattoo artists get to literally Plagiarizer other peoples work?
Guillaume Ricard I don’t think you realise, but tattoos are different. None of the above is gonna be with you for life and ends up on your skin. Once you accept payment it’s done you have given it over. I dunno about you but I’ve never heard of any furniture company to and sue anyone for seeing their furniture in a movie. Tattoo artists already fall into a grey area legally cause they can plagiarise work from companies and people. But honestly just cause you were the medium for putting an idea into ink doesn’t mean you own shit.
@@guillaumericard1233 if I buy a one of a kind painting, it's mine. That's why there's original paintings that are worth a ton of money and fake 2 dollar knockoffs. If I was getting paid because of the way I look and my tattoos , it's mine. If not than every tattoo artist out there that has done a portrait of a celebrity or someones family member or one of the countless movie characters or comic books should be sued for copyright infringement. I don't think you see how flawed your agreement is.
@@SS-L.O.T.O. Legally speaking DC could sue an artist for selling an image of batman, they don't because it would be a PR nightmare for them. They would also sue the artist, not the client because the client wasn't trying to impose the rights to the image.
When you pay for a tattoo you are paying for two things, an original piece and a skill set to have the piece placed onto you. However, in order to own the rights to reprint and sell that piece you need to have that specifically stated in the contract. Legally speaking if a tattoo artist could take the tattoo he/she designed for you and put it on 30 other people after you. They don't because it's bad PR.
1:43 lol I love that part 🤣 also it be like that when you see someone else’s perspective that u would’ve never thought of yourself.
All these artists always cheer me up. They have funny personalities.
It’s like buying a print of an image. You pay for that physical version of it but the artist owns the design
alex pugh-Harris more like having a commission of a concept
I think that it depends on if you commission it or use a flash.
A flash tattoo would be like buying a print. Normal tattoos are getting a commission where once you've paid, you own the design
That's only the case if it's a designed that was in the artist's portfolio, doesn't apply to commissioned work.
@@irabbit_ how is that not fair? you were paid your $20. if you don't think that's enough, charge more, why don't you just make your own artwork and sell prints and make your own $100? you sold the art, its no longer yours.
It’s a commission for the client.
Would you say the contractor owns the house because he built it... no... the person who paid for it owns it
Stupid comparison that makes no sense.
Sure, by that you can say they own the piece on their skin. Not necessarily the right to copy the design and sell it. Which can be done in many different ways.
Can't do such things with a house.
The closest i guess is perhaps selling the design plans and documents the architect made.
@@HiddenStr3ngth nope, Disney cartoons aren't made by the ceo of Disney but once the artist they paid to draw and animate stuff for them draws something for them, it's theirs to put on merchandise, recreate and make billions of off. That's how commercial art legally works and tattoos fall under commercial art.
But the issue then is if the person who bought the house then takes the blueprints for the house and starts selling those
@@MurielROT no it would be if the person took pictures of the house and sold those. Btw the person is legally allowed to do both, it's just the blueprint makes less sense because if someone wanted to recreate the house they'd have to adjust the blueprints to their land and terrain, so it's better to take pictures and redraw the blueprints to your specifications. It also doesn't make sense because no one buys unoriginal blueprints , you can buy pictures if you wanted to keep them as art, blueprints have to be submitted to the city board and you can literally get them from the internet for free.
@@user-qp5xh9ky4t Correct, the Disney CEO owns it but that's because artists who work there sign a contract when they're hired that during their employment they release their rights to work created there as an artist. If you didn't get the rights on paper you don't own the rights and cannot reprint it. You can own the original but you do not own the rights to it.
The guy at the beginning got it right and the rest of this discussion wasn’t necessary. He hit the nail on the head. For private use, it’s yours 100% as any commissioned piece of artwork is, but if you use that piece of work and recreate it for profit then they are within their rights to at least fight for some compensation
I think it comes down to communication and honesty between artist and client. If a client is getting a piece done thats designed by the tattooer its common courtesy to disclose if you plan on using that design in other projects because that can change the artists rates.
8:12 The guy knows the stuff... he ask the client.👏🏽👏🏽👏🏽
Ok so what if I drew my own art... do you own part of it now because you tattooed it??
Nope, it should be all yours.
I like the colab Idea of tattoos, that it's both the artist and the client
It's cool seeing a variety of opinons instead of just one for and one against
You should make a tattoo artists answer on refusing a tattoo but this time show them different tattoos and see if they would refuse it or not.
So a tattoo artist can profit of work and art, however if something they sell (physical tattoo image) then creates profit now some feel entitled to a cut? I appreciate the ones who said I sold the art to my client.
JacquelineCRIA i agree I’m saying the same thing like I already payed you. You don’t get anymore of a my money because your “CUT” was already payed for when I hired YOU the tattoo artist to make this tattoo so the tattoo is not the artists it is the clients
I loved seeing Kelly Doty!!💚🖤💚
3:07 the only dude that is actually knowledgeable and not just giving an opinion respect !
Woah why is there a puppet did I miss something
I think that artist doesn't show his face.
I believe its van lovett he has severe burns on his body and doesnt like being on camera
unless otherwise stated: client owns physical tattoo and artist own the design of it
Client owns everything you paid for the tattoo AND THE DESIGN.It is what it is,the artists don't own a design they create for a certain person
@@JohnJohn-hw1gh no. No matter the medium, the creator has the right to the content; the client only owns their purchase - that physical copy. The client has no right to drafts or reproductions.
Knightworm / What if the client is also the artist who pays to get the artwork tattooed on them?
Nobody Knows because the artist gives your idea physical form? You might have some argument if the artist is tattooing over a stencil drawn by you, but the design outweighs the concept no doubt. Ultimately all legality falls to whatever agreement is signed by you and your artist though, so the argument is pointless.
@Nobody Knows You can't own the right to a concept, only the right of an expression of a concept.
If you were to explain a concept to multiple tattoo artist's, their expression of that concept could vary in style, composition, colour, etc. Therefore, the concept cannot be copyrighted.
Glad to see Kelly in this. Hope she's in more.
As a photographer what I've done for years is that the product (commissioned or not) is the property of the client. However the right of use of said product has to be discussed in the payment and contract right from the get go.
This is different for each case, if the use case is simply a print the price is different than if they want to use it as part of a campaign and they want exclusive right of use for the image. Selling an image and selling the rights for said image are and should be treated as two different things. I can sell a print a million times to a million different people, but I can only sell the rights once (and even then they cannot sell it as their own work afterwards) and the price of those transactions are very different.
In summary the artist should discuss the potential use of said image beforehand and if the art is commissioned and desired for exclusive and external use then there should be a markup for the exclusivity of the use of said image.
This is actually really interesting, especially as someone who studies art history and has to know and evaluate a lot of client / artist relationships concerning the finished artwork. Here’s my take. The design and the rights to the design/idea belong to the artist, unless the client had an influence on the design. If the client influenced the design, the design belongs to the client or the client and the artist. If the artist comes up with a design following the exact demands of the client, the design belongs to client. The actual piece of art, the literal skin on the body of the client, belongs to the client and they can do with it what they want. If a client sold prints of their tattoo with said prints being the actual tattoo on their body I would be fine with that, but if they traced and or edited it in a way where it is just the tattoo art or the design and doesn’t include their body - that breaks boundaries. I generally feel like there has to be a separation between tattoo artist that get commissioned and put said commission on your body and get payed for creating art and inking it on you VS tattoo artist that get paid to ink art on you. If the client bought your design and you as an artist they should be able to with it what they want, if they only bought your work and basically hired you to just Tattoo on them they shouldn’t. Look at it like paying an artist vs paying a house painter. One would pay the artist for time, design, idea, execution and materials while a painter would basically just be payed for his time, even if they ended up doing the same exact thing. Just depends on what you’re looking to get done.
Good luck getting most of the arguments to hold up in court. The guy that said it's commercial design is correct
The puppet was so random lmao I loved it
Terms of service for every type of artist is huge. It keeps things under rule and protects the artist.
I've designed all of my own tattoos so obviously I own them and the ideas. Ivd consider it a form of stealing if my tattoo artist used my design on someone else.
I think it's like buying a painting, you can't distribute the artwork you bought but you own it in your private collection
Good discussion! I am a jewelry artist and there is loads of discussions about copyright and plagiarism. In my world, if you make something and someone takes the design, calls it their own and profits from it = bad. If you make something based on another's design, give them credit (inspired by) or get their permission before = accepted. When I do commission pieces they belong to the client.
I did an essay on copyright. I remember distinctly that you cannot copyright a concept but you can copyright your unique/original expression of the concept.
For example, in the style of still life, the concept of having a book, skull, and hourglass to represent the passing of someone cannot be copyrighted. However, if the artist chose to put them in a specific lighting, facing a particular angle, and include various miscellaneous items that represents the person their painting is about, then that can be copyrighted.
Isn't the client basically just like the canvas for the art? I can't commission Picasso to paint a painting and then go print it on a tshirt and sell it for millions, I just paid for this one canvas. I would say the same applies to the client. They pay to become a canvas for the artist and can do with their skin/piece of canvas whatever they like including destroy it, but they can not copy it and make a profit off of the artist's work.
I am saying that as someone who does not have a tattoo nor am I legally educated in that topic, but thematically that's how I see it. Client = canvas. Artist = artist. The right to a tattoo is the same as the right to a painting because that's what it essentially is.
i wouldnt say someone's body and a canvas are the same, what if i wanted to make shirts of my body. and my body has tattoos, and the shirts blow up. should my tattoo artist get paid? no. i PAID them to draw on me. now its mine to do whatever i want with it even if i make shirts with it, its mine because i bought it in the first place. the artist doesn't just get to get money if i get successful
I00% ownership goes to the recipient... the artist is paid for his/her work.
Every tattoo is unique... and expression of the client... that's why we PAY the tattoo artist.
Not necessarily true. I would say many tattoos are an expression of the artist with no input from the client.
If I happen to draw a full flash sheet of Cranes (for example), and you happen to really like Cranes and get one of them tattooed, there is no collaboration from the client involved in the actual artwork, it's purely my idea that they happen to like enough to put on their body.
I do agree with your comment, however I believe it goes both ways.
Client paid to have the artwork to reproduce it and make money out of it is where the artist can waive their rights into the argument.
@@lillybinns2941 It's different when it comes to flash. Shops don't have to design them in house, and can buy sheets of flash from any artist, tattooist or otherwise, and I doubt they get paid a percentage each time someone pays to have it tattooed on them.
Exactly, unless it's a flash tattoo. You want ownership of my tattoo? Stipulate that upfront with a contract, in which case, I will go to someone else.
If you pay someone to paint you a picture, the original design is still owned by them and unless stated beforehand, you cant use it for commercial use or reproduce it. You can take the painting and take a picture of it to use as your profile picture or hang it in a public space, you own that specific item to do with what you want, but you dont own the design or idea unless you and the tattooist collaborated on it. And being like "I want a pug puking up rainbows with demon horns." is still too generic. The artist still has to design it. I mean if you come to them with some artwork you yourself made or a photo you own and have them work with that, they dont get ownership of it just because they make additions. They do however get ownership of the completed design as their own rendition... But it works both ways at that point because they cant reproduce that tattoo because you still own your part of the art. They would have to edit your stuff out.
It's the same in media and digital art. If you watch a video with some guns n roses playing for a certain point then that doesnt mean you own Sweet Child o Mine just because you own the video as your creation. If you were to sell that video or monetize it you would have to edit the copyrighted stuff out.
This was really great, hearing everyone 's ideas. I 'm heavily tattooed and for the most part I feel like if I paid for it and it's on my body, it 's my tattoo. But I wouldn't have it printed on t-shirts to sell; in the same vein I would expect that if it 's an original commissioned piece that the artist wouldn't replicate it on someone else. But I don't get flash "art"
Like the way Robbie Ripoll explains shit.. insightful dude
It being a collaboration is a good way to put it. The canvas, money, and idea are provided by the client, while the expertise, labor, and creativity come from the artist. both parties own it in its entirety and should hash out all that t-shirt, mug, etc stuff later.
Yes, Paul Booth!
My friend just became a tattoo artist (finished apprenticeship). With my most recent tattoo, my friend designed it specifically for me, and did an amazing job tattooing it. In my opinion, it is both his and my tattoo.
I would say it really depends. If the client comes in with an idea and gives the artist the details for a sketch or tattoo, then I would say it's a joint ownership. If the artist made a design based on the personality of the client and had been given no idea or details, it's the artists. And if the Client came in with a sketch for the piece, it's the clients (whether or not the artist adjusted a few things, the client made it, so they own it). In any other circumstance, I'd say they'd have to talk about it
YAY KELLY!!!
What happens when a tattoo artist uses a painting as a reference?
If it isnt their original piece then the original artist owns it. Same said for disney characters. However the tattooist owns that specific design as long as it's changed enough.
Good point.
That would mean, the client would pay the tattoo artist and the tattoo artist would have to pay the painter a percentage...
damn. Real good point. I bet if you said that to some of these tattoo artists (who think they DO deserve it) they’d be like “no, cause it’s the REFERENCE” nahhhh bullshit. Lmao. 😂
@Nobody Knows You try to connect dots with strawman arguments that really don't make any sense. The tattoo artist still has to create a rendition of that photo, they are not stapling the photo to you, and you AS the copyright holder are asking them to translate the photo to a different form of art. You are giving them permission by verbal or written contract that you want that photo turned into a tattoo. There would be no 'infringement" that you could sue over.
@@CAM-tk9xr If it's a reference then it just uses the vague notion of the image or small parts to create a different, unique whole. OP asked about that, in which case it's fine. The most you should be expected do is credit your references, but since the new image is different and not in anyway copied from any references then that belongs to you. If they flat out copy a dog off a picture, even freehand then you're doing a little more than referencing. That shit is fine for practice but you have to change the original to have it be yours.
Using a reference isn't plagiarizing tho so it's good. As long as you don't copy someone elses image in it's entirety.
I lost it when the puppet came in. He got some cool ink too.
lol at kelly getting distracted by how much she loves law and order. love her
So when a piece of art is sold at auction does the artist get a percentage?
When museums sell prints are artists paid?
The artist will get paid when they sell the original art piece. If it's sold after that they won't get compensated. The artist will get compensated for any prints of their work.
Actually as an artist this is something we're actually trying to change about the fine art industry right now, because that system means that museums and corporations keep getting huge amounts of profit where the actual artists may still be struggling to get by.
Wouldn't it be more like having art commissioned rather than just buying a painting that already exists?
Yeah, assuming it's designed for you i'd say so. You're the canvas for them to artistically express themselves.
2:21 well said. Its an art work paid for, for the customer to own.
To what the puppet said: As a designer you can work on a logo (for example) for a company. You rely on the marketing department or whatever to collaborate with you so your design /branding is well used in all sorts of scenarios. It's usually referred to as brand guide. You need to know where and how it needs to be used so you can prevent misuse that might break or undervalue your design & the brands awareness/ value / etc. But you can still clearly outline that they can use the design only in specified ways. They can't edit it, they can't sell it to other parties, etc. They only have the rights to use it as their brand's branding and beyond that you can limit the mediums they can show it on (for what use they have license for - for example look how 500px or Getty images handles different types of licensing). So there's a lot of examples that you can own something you buy, but you can't sell it. Also you can have limitations how and where you can use it. It's not really complicated several industries already quite solved it before you.
Heard of a case where a vet bought a painting from an artist for display in their clinic. They decided they liked the painting so much they used part of it in their logo and used it on business cards etc - the artist took them to court and won because the vets only had the rights to the physical painting, not to reproduce and profit from it etc.
The way I see it is like this. The customer owns the tattoo. As has been stated in this video, the tattoo artist is on contract to put art onto my body. Once it's there, I own it. It's my piece.
However, the tattoo artist isn't necessarily left out completely. If someone admires my piece, I'll throw the artists name out there, and hopefully that will give him/her some business. Everybody wins at that point.
Paul Booth returns.
MORE PLEASE
It depends on the aggreement between the artist and the client. As a freelance artist, there's a difference between a personal commission (paying solely for the service of creating an artwork) and a piece with commercial rights (paying for a design to be used for advertising or redistribution). I think the problem is that many artists don't have/seek the legal knowledge to draw up proper contracts with their clients, and this is a huge problem because they SHOULD.
Ok, let's say you would make contacts with every client about this. How many clients would go to your shop and come back again after this?
@@sarafirewall250 I don't know because I'm not a tattoo artist, but for what it's worth I'm a freelance artist with repeat customers and people generally trust you more when you outline your terms, whether that be a CC license for personal use or full rights for marketing and commercial redistribution. For example, if you order a unique design from a tattoo artist who thinks attribution laws are stupid, are you going to trust that artist not to put your design on another person, or to use it for their own merch?
@@sorathe tattoo artists forget that their canvases are people. Artists don't own client's skin. But they can take pictures of their work and add it to their portfolio. And some artists actually use that design again on other clients or even paintings what makes original clients upset because their tattoo is not unique anymore. Tattooing is a service industry, which means that it 100 percent depends on their clients. Let's see I would go to a nail salon and a master gives me a contract that my nail design is unique and i have to wear a trade mark on each nail... I don't say that an artist would not have any clients at all but he would not have so much profit of this 4-5 clients who have probably been tattooed by him before. He would have problems with getting new clients. Some talked about Nike logo as an example. Yes, having this logo on a random t-shirt is illegal but tattooing the logo isn't!!! So the artist would not be suited despite the fact that he uses someone's intellectual property for his profit. Also they can tattoo a celebrity's face but I never heard that someone's paid for that. Tattoo industry is not just an art. So it can not be applicable to intellectual property laws. It can be very difficult to provide that it is your design and you have all the rights of it in a court. If people go in tattooing business just because of money they shouldn't be in this industry. You have a request, you're making a design, you are tattooing it and that's it. What the client would do with this tattoo is not your business anymore.
@@sarafirewall250 ok
Oh good another type of case to study in law school
Imagine if you buy a logo. You either buy it or make an agreement on a percentage of the money earned using the logo. If you buy it you own the design. The woman who made the nike logo got 35$ for it. Nike doesn’t pay her royalties because they bought the design
It's a rounded checkmark. It was worth 35$
Yes but Nike bought the legal rights to the logo. As a customer at a tattoo shop, you aren't buying the legal rights to the design of your tattoo unless stated in the contract
@@kittymcmeowmeow1 you're buying an original piece of art. The canvas is just your skin
@@TheOldAmishMan yes, you're buying the art, but not the legal rights to reproduce and sell that piece of art
It all comes down to the agreement/the contract signed i.e. it depends on what kind of copyright the client is paying for. It is assumed that the copyright of the artwork is being assigned to the client via the consideration i.e. the payment but that needs to be determined between the artist and the client. (I say consideration because is it required for the contract to be legally binding)
The reason it gets confusing is because copyright can also be licensed, meaning the licensor (the owner of the work) is giving the licensee (the person who wants to rent the work) the right to use their work for a determined period of time. Music publishing works in that way. the artist (or label) will license a song to a company to use in, let's say, a commercial that will be aired for a period of 3 months. so the song is licensed to them for 3 months. Only thing is a tattoo is permanent, you can't give it back to the artist. So therefore I think the rights should be assigned to the client.
I personally wouldn't want any of my tattoos to go onto another person because they're mine. I co-designed and paid for them and they mean a lot to me. I guess because regulations on tattoos is still a new thing and low key non existent, there's a big grey area because there are some symbols and designs that you can't just claim the copyright to like for example an anchor, or a love heart, or a skull. Those belong in the public domain. But if it's a full blown design that is an original or has the artists own unique spin on, I think the rights of that artwork that is now permanently tattooed onto their skin should be ASSIGNED to the client once they've paid for it. They should be paying for both the service and the artwork.
In regards to someone taking the artwork putting it on a shirt and selling it for money, it should be morally the right thing to do to give the tattoo artist at least a percentage of that profit, or just not do that at all. But at the end of the day, the client paid for the artwork and the service so that transaction means that the artwork now belongs to the client. Happens to musicians and celebrities all the time, people take their faces or logos, put them on a shirt and sell them for money. I don't see those musicians and celebrities getting any percentage of those sales...
Idk if this is already a video but I would like one of how to do proper research for the artist with the style you want. Like the dos and don'ts on how to look for the perfect artist for your tattoo style.
The client owns it... if they cover it up the artist can’t sue them it’s on the clients body.
You buy a piece of art, tattoo or painting, it's yours. Simple
Lil Van got it, I'm on board with his definition of colaboration
Love me or hate me, I skip the video every time I see the puppet. 😂
1:28 Actually that is the exact opposite of what happens when you sell a painting. That _particular_ painting is theirs but the contents of it are not. You can't just buy a shitty poster copy of the Mona Lisa and then go to the Louvre demanding the real thing because you don't *own* the Mona Lisa, you own a poster. Nor could you take the copy you have and _duplicate_ it to sell to others. You own *_just_* that copy.
I see tattoo's as being the exact same thing. Who ever *designed* the tattoo, be that the tattoo artist or the client, is the one who owns the artwork. When you pay for a tattoo to be put on you (going back to the painting reference) you are paying for the poster, not the contents. I would say you have to buy the design (be it a license or trademark for it) separately if you intend to use it outside of _just_ the art on your body if you did not personally design the tattoo. If you as a client did the design, then the tattoo artist got paid to copy _your_ work onto the medium of your choosing that being _your_ body, so they have no claim to it. Simple as that.
edit:
Also, same principle as the poster. Whoever has the tattoo on them can alter it however the fuck they want to because it's not the base art itself, it's their _copy_ of it. You're not defacing the Mona Lisa itself if you take a sharpie to your poster and draw a mustache on it. The _tattoo_ is yours, you can do whatever the hell you want with it once it's on your body (complete or not). Full stop.
Tattoo artist are not Davinchi. If they want to have the whole control of the design they shouldn't be in this industry and switch to the oil painting. Tattooing is not just an art but more a custom service.
If tattoo artists feel they can make money off of their work being a print, that's the business they should be in. Not tattooing people and then having partial ownership of them lmao
I feel like it's my artist's tattoo and I always tell em ima take care of your work lol. I'm just the canvas lol
I currently have 5 tattoos. The first 4 are between 10 and 20 years old and are flash tattoos. Obviously while they are on my body, I definitely don't own those designs.
The 5th tattoo I actually got done a couple of weeks ago and I designed it myself. The tattoo artist literally tattooed my own drawing on me. It's a line drawing with some numbers and those are clearly in my handwriting. The only thing the tattoo artist improvised where the watercolors I asked him to color around the design, I even told him what colors I wanted but he free handed the placement. It's a very personal tattoo I spend a year on creating, so I feel pretty confident to say that I do completely own that one.
Paul Booth is a genius
I draw all my tattoos so it’s my tattoo right cause they only thing they did was tattoo it on my skin 😂
Same lol
Yes because you created the design and therefore own the legal rights to it.
Casual Miguel Cotto name drop that got me SUPREMELY interested in Juan Salgado, lol.
It's like a co-ownership. We both own it, we are in on this together. We can develop a relationship through the art put on our bodies.
If im paying you (with a tip) to give me something, its mine
Client pays, it’s theirs. Simple.
@@11BscoutNG what contract. The contract that's says this is permanent and you are of legal age?
8:24
The business logo comparison made me really think about this🤔
Paul Booth is the guy you didn't want tattooing you when you enter the shop, but you're glad he did because his voice is like apple butter and I bet he's incredibly gentle
"I'm the artist and this is my art, therefore I own the tattoo and the design." Says the people who tattoo other people's design on their clients and charge for it.
Buuuurn
That's exactly why flash is generally cheaper than originals. You're only paying for the skill set of placing the design onto you.
Lol what where is that coming from? What proof do you have that their doing that, as basically all proper tattoo artists won't use someone else's design.
Simple. I bring the artwork you stencil it and trace it, I own it. If I pick it from your folder or commission you to draw something, you own it.
Those 2 hit the nail on the head. It depends what the waiver the client signs says. You are selling your art to the client. So unless your waiver says you’re allowed to reuse the design for yourself (basically keeping the license for the art just displaying it on the client.)
I would say it’s like any personal art commission-the individual has full personal rights but cannot use the art commercially without permission/signing over of the rights. Copyright-wise (in the US at least) art copyrights belong to the artist automatically (claimed copyright)-though a lawsuit can only be carried out if the copyright is filed officially(which would take some extra time and money on top of the actual lawsuit).
*Even though I'm past my goth/emo phase, I still love Kelly*
Let's see:
My body ✔️
My money✔️
My idea ✔️
🤔
Yeah, tattoo is mine.
True but the art itself is not yours so you can't make money off of it. If I commission a piece of art and pay for it, I can't just turn around and sell that picture on things like shirts or stickers because the picture is mine but the art itself isn't. I may have had the idea for it but the artist still drew it and could take me to court if I make money off of it. Most artists have something that says that the buyer cant do things like that which is why tattoos is a little more of a grey area but the idea is the same.
@@dixychickx123 I get your point, but I can draw too so the only difference between me and the artist is tattoo machine and experience in tattooing.
I paid him once. That's it.
If you drew out your idea and all the tattoo artist did was help you get it inked onto you body, than the design belongs to you. I do this all the time, haha.
@@SA_Caine also if artist use some pictures as a point of reference. And tattoo artist doing something like that all the time. So, for example, if I had an idea and artist used someone else art to draw my idea, why artists should be entitled to some "rights"?
@@redgenerall28 Because even if they use reference, it's their interpretation. Artists use reference all the time, it's to help with composition and anatomy and such. Now they shouldn't copy every little thing from the reference unless it's for a study or it's the client's art and the client wants it exactly how the drew it. There's a difference. Use it enough to help you, but not to the point where it's a direct exact copy.
In the music industry there’s two copyrights: the composition copyright of the piece (production, arrangement, songwriting etc) And the performance copyright (the singer/band)
I think this should be put into place in the tattoo industry where (as long as the artist approves) the client can replicate, sell merch etc with the tattoo’s image as long as the original artist gets say 50% of any profits made
Ugh I love Ron Russo his tattoos are another level