LexisNexis® CLE On-Demand features premium content from partners like American Law Institute Continuing Legal Education and Pozner & Dodd. Choose from a broad listing of topics suited for law firms, corporate legal departments, and government entities. Individual courses and subscriptions available.
While in Las Vegas, S. Victor Whitmill applied an original tattoo to the side of boxer Mike Tyson's face. Mr. Whitmill registered a copyright in the tattoo, and Mike Tyson signed a release acknowledging that all artwork, sketches, drawings and photographs related to the tattoo were Mr. Whitmill's property. Recently, Mr. Whitmill learned that the Hangover 2 features a virtually exact reproduction of the tattoo. In the movie, the tattoo appears on the upper left side of the Stu Price character's face, played by actor Ed Helms. The tattoo is also prominently featured in the movie's marketing and promotional materials, including movie posters.
On April 28, Mr. Whitmill filed a lawsuit against Warner Bros., accusing the company of copyright infringement. Mr. Whitmill is seeking damages and an injunction restraining the tattoo's display, both in the movie and otherwise.
Read the entire complaint filed in S. Victor Whitmill vs. Warner Bros. Entertainment Inc., 11-cv-00752 (E.D. Mo. April 28, 2011)
Related items of interest:
1-2 Nimmer on Copyright § 2.08[B] Pictorial, Graphic, and Sculptural Works - Works of Art (If you do not have a lexis.com ID, you can purchase Nimmer on Copyright at the LexisNexis Store)
Included within the Section 102(a)(5) category of pictorial, graphic, and sculptural works are " 'works of art' in the traditional sense ... [and] also works of graphic art, and illustration, art reproductions ... and works of 'applied art.' " 48 This includes not only the fine arts of painting, drawing, and sculpture, but also (subject to the qualifications discussed below), 49 works of applied art. 50 ....
9th Circuit Splits On Tattooing's 1st Amendment Protection; Finds It Fully Protected/Purely Expressive Activity
In a case of first impression, the Ninth Circuit recently addressed whether a municipal ban on tattoo parlors violated the First Amendment. Splitting with several jurisdictions, the Ninth Circuit held that tattooing was ....
For more information about LexisNexis products and solutions connect with us through our corporate site.