The implications for tattooists are discussed in a paper for the current issue (Vol. 31, Issue 2) of The Cardozo Arts & Entertainment Law Journal where author Craig P. Bloom outlines the legal position in ‘Hangover Effect: May I See Your Tattoo, Please?’
“Hanging over every tattooed individual is the potential for a copyright infringement lawsuit. Yet, an implied license remains a powerful shield that protects a tattoo holder from such actions.“
For some experts, explains the author, take the position that :
“By virtue of the unique nature of a tattoo, which is permanently affixed to and displayed on a person’s skin, a tattoo holder has an implied license to use, display and exploit the tattoo.”
Others are not so convinced : e.g. copyright authority David Nimmer (author of Copyright in the Dead Sea Scrolls: Originality and Authorship, (Hous. L. Rev. 1, 2001) who posits (in Whitmill v. Warner Bros, 2011)
“… human flesh cannot serve as the ‘medium of expression’ that Congress intended to embody legally protectible authorship.”
Returning to Bloom, the author concludes that the contentious issue of tattoo copyright remains to this date, (in the US at least) quite ill-defined :
“… the issue of whether tattoos can be copyrighted remains unsettled and novel in the sense that no judicial decision has been rendered on the merits.”
Also see : Tattoo disruption avoidance and Body: Search for Deviants and Professorial Product Placement.
Bonus : (old) joke : Seen on tattooist’s studio window “TATTOOS : WHILE YOU WAIT”
Credit : The retouched public domain picture above is courtesy of the FDA ‘Think Before You Ink’