About a year ago, we posted about Tattoos On Screen, offering a brief overview about the errors and omissions clearance issues posed by reproducing tattoos inked on actors bodies in film and TV projects. Our early adopter status didn’t much help, though: little did we know that, during the recent, er, period of repose that this blog experienced, there would be a major news story talking about, what else, tattoos on screen and that we wouldn’t have time to weigh in on the matter. Rather than do a poor job of attempting to rehash what others have already written about the topic, we offer a selection of some of the best pieces from the legal blogosphere over the last few weeks about The Hangover Part II and the replication of Mike Tyson’s facial tattoo:
- Brent Randall wrote an excellent and detailed post at IPilogue – Legal “Hangover” For Warner Bros. Over Mike Tyson Tattoo – which also features further discussion in the comments from David Vaver which is well worth reading
- Gordon P. Firemark offers an interesting take on the need for people with tattoos (tattooees?) to ensure they have obtained copyright in their designs: Getting a tattoo? If you’re in the media you need to get the copyright too!
- Simon Fodden at slaw offers his alliterative thoughts on the topic: The Tyson Tattoo Turmoil
- Rachel Valadez at Law Law Land wrote the seminal blog post on the topic: The Hangover 2 and the Tyson Tattoo: Lessons in Copyright, Contract, and Clearance
