A Tattoo Artist’s Triumph Over Copyright: A Jazzed-Up Legal Battle

Share

The case against celebrity tattoo artist Kat Von D is regarded as the first U.S. case which discussed copyright infringement in respect of tattoos.

The plaintiff Jeffrey Sedlik, a renowned photographer based in California, United States, captured the photograph of the famous American Jazz artist Miles Davis in 1989. Since then, Sedlik’s picture has become an iconic picture of Davis. It was included by Life magazine in its yearly “Pictures of the Year” issue.

The defendant, Kat Von D, a well-known American tattoo artist for well-known celebrity clients like Lady Gaga, Miley Cyrus, Rihanna, etc., was sued by photographer Jeffrey Sedlik for copyright infringement in February 2021. It was alleged that Kat Von D tattooed a portrait of Miles Davis on the arms of her close friend Blake Farmer seven years ago, based on the photograph taken by Jeffrey Sedlik.

The Plaintiff contended that the photo and the tattoo were so stunningly similar.

He stated that Von D had replicated the photograph of the jazz superstar and used it as a model to design a tattoo on her friend’s arm. The plaintiff further argued that Von D made money off of the tattoo by posting images of it and her line drawings on Instagram. They emphasised on the meticulous work Sedlik did to set up the shoot, to create the lighting and mood, and to put Davis in the pose that would make for an iconic photo that was first published on the cover of JAZZIZ magazine in 1989. The plaintiff stated that Sedlik registered the copyright in 1994 and explained that licensing the image to others, particularly tattoo artists, was a significant part of how Sedlik made a living.

The defendant contended that the tattoo was a form of fair use, which is a copyright law exemption for works that include parody, commentary, and criticism. Fair use is a legal doctrine that allows the use of copyrighted material without permission from the copyright owner under certain circumstances. The doctrine is designed to balance the interests of copyright owners with the public interest in promoting free expression and creativity. In the instant case of Kat Von D’s tattoo of Miles Davis, the defendant argued that the tattoo was a transformative work that added new meaning to the original photograph. They pointed out that the tattoo was not a direct copy of the photograph but rather a reinterpretation of it. They highlighted that in order for a tattoo to be considered as fair use, there should not be an attempt to profit from the picture. It was argued that the tattoo could not be considered as commercial use of the photograph and that Von D had not profited from it. The defendant’s argument was that the tattoo was a form of artistic expression and that such an art should also be protected. He argued that the tattoo was a unique and original work that was entitled to copyright protection. He also pointed out that the tattoo was created for non-commercial purposes and that it was not intended to compete with the original photograph.

The jury completely disagreed with the Plaintiff’s arguments and decided unanimously in favour of the defendant. They decided that Von D’s use of photographer Jeff Sedlik’s well-known 1989 shot of jazz artist Miles Davis as the inspiration for her friend Blake Farmer’s tattoo did not violate Sedlik’s copyright. The jurors also concluded that Von D had not made money from the replica and that it was not sufficiently close to Sedlik’s portrait of Davis for her to pay compensation to Sedlik for infringement.

The case is significant because it is one of the first instances where a tattoo artist has been sued for copyright infringement. Kat Von D’s lawyer argued that the tattoo was a form of fair use and that it was entitled to copyright protection. He emphasised that the tattoo was a transformative work that added new meaning to the original photograph and that it was not a commercial use of the photograph. It’s like a game of tattoo roulette, where the odds are stacked against the artists. But Kat Von D’s victory is a ray of hope for the tattoo community, a sign that they can continue to create beautiful and unique tattoos without the fear of legal repercussions.

Written by Aathmaja Menon, Legal Intern and Verified by Sunil Jose, Managing Attorney, Suns Legal.

Share

Recent Post

Follow Us

Cookie Consent with Real Cookie Banner