How much do UFC fighters receive for having their likenesses in video games? If you’re Carlos Condit its $22,500. This was revealed in a lawsuit filed by Condit’s tattoo artist against the makers of the UFC video game according to The Hollywood Reporter.
The legal wrangling arises out of the THQ bankruptcy and the bankruptcy court’s valuation of a copyright infringement claim by Condit’s tattoo artist, Christopher Escobedo. Condit’s lion tattoo over his rib cage is displayed in the video game, UFC Undisputed. Escobedo inked the tattoo on Condit.
Since THQ is in Chapter 11 bankruptcy, the lawsuit that was originally filed in Arizona Federal Court came under the jurisdiction of the Bankruptcy Court. Escobedo’s original complaint requested damages in the amount of $4.16 million which was 2% of all post-bankruptcy petition sales.
Escobedo’s rationale for the hefty amount was based on the sales of the game (4.1 million units of the game sold), that Condit was a popular fighter (as he was the interim Welterweight champ at the time) and Condit’s character appeared in the video game with the visible image of the lion tattoo. Escobedo’s lawyer argued that the Court should take into consideration what a hypothetical negotiation would produce between Escobedo and THQ. The Bankruptcy Court did not agree and determined the value to Escobedo was the same amount that Condit was paid for his likeness: $22,500. Even after a motion for reconsideration, the Court was not swayed.
The Court provided this guidance as to its ruling:
“As THQI demonstrated, the value of Escobedo’s claim must be reduced to reflect (a) the exceedingly low value of a license of a single tattoo to a game depicting more than a hundred fighters, hundreds of tattoos and songs, and myriad other creative elements, (b) the likelihood that a tattoo on another person’s body is not copyrightable, (c) the likelihood that Condit has an implied license to license to THQ his own digital image (including an image of the Lion Tattoo), without restriction by a tattoo artist; and (d) the likelihood that, if the Lion Tattoo is copyrightable, Condit would have to at least be considered a joint author of the tattoo with an equal right to license it to others.”
Payout Perspective:
Tattoo copyright issues is starting to become a concern and has drawn notice from the NFL and its player’s union due to potential liability issues. Its an interesting question as to 1) who own’s the copyright on the tattoo? 2) whether the actual artist should be compensated for its depiction? 3) what are the rights of the individual that actually has the tattoo?
But maybe the first question is whether a tattoo deserves copyright protection. While most legal analysts believe that a tattoo can be copyrightable, one has to consider whether the individual sporting the ink has an implied license once they leave the tattoo parlor. One of the proposed ways to address the situation is to have tattoo artists sign waivers for their work and/or compensate the artists in other ways (autographed ball, shorts or maybe tweeting out the work with the artist’s handle). It appears that most times that level of publicity is want the artists wants for business.
The one other takeaway from the Escobedo claim is that Condit received $22,500 for his likeness in the video game which makes one consider the pay of other lesser and more known fighters in the video game. Its another area of compensation in addition to actual fighting.
“who own’s the copyright on the tattoo?”
I think this is absurd copyright overreaching on the part of the tattoo artist. If this keeps on surfacing all that it’s going to do is make it so you have to ask for a transfer of ownership or make it clear in an agreement that this is a work-for-hire. Also, the fact that it is inked to your own body can make things a little bit more complicated and confusing as far as trying to enforce a copyright on it IMO.
man, what about condits barber who did his haircut which also appears in the video game, I must assume
does wandy’s beauty surgeon also have a copyright on wandys new looks?
this is ridiculous, isn’t it?!
I agree. That is crazy. So Mike Tysons tattoo artist can keep him from ever appearing on tv or working in public without covering his face?
Honestly I think the artist should be thrown in jail for filing a frivolous lawsuit. Or at the very least fined 10% of they were attempting to recover in “damages”. This would make people think twice before filing suit and it would make them assign more accurate damages estimates for fear of having to pay the 10%.
US legal system is sideways crooked. Lawyers are the scum of the earth.
So Brainsmasher is cool with the UFC going after people downloading files, but not an artist going after for-profit use of his art? This case and others like it are very legitimate. I guess BS is only concerned about copyright when it is the UFC’s copyright that is being protected.
Anyone want to chip in and send Random Douche to night school? This wouldn’t interfere with his job at McDonalds. Come on guys lets adopt a inner city scumbag!
So you don’t factor in this “artist” was paid for his services and his art. Basically he sold that art. Just like buying a painting from a real artist. They cant tell you what to do with it after they sold it to you. The UFC isn’t willfully giving them product to those who are stealing it. Those stealing it have not paid for it. Tattooing someone doesn’t entitle them to be your slave. Also this is in a video game. I don’t think the tattoo in game is was a pick but a similar Lion created by another artist. It would be almost impossible to make it an exact copy.
I could understand if this was designs the tattoo guy had created and had in their book of designs. I would even go so far as thinking he had a case if someone was to see that tattoo and start using it on other people. But not when its an image of the guy you sold it to. LOCK HIM UP!!!
BS,
You may already know this, but Tyson’s face tattoo artist filed suit against The Hangover and he settled out of court.
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2011/05/21/business/media/20110521tattoo-case.html?_r=0
RD,
It’s a stretch to assume that including the tattoo in the game is a “for profit” use of the tattoo. The tattoo is only included in the game because it happens to be on Condit. The tattoo is irrelevant to the profits earned by the game manufacturers.
Condit licensed his likeness to THQ for the game and that includes his height, his looks, his hair cut and his tattoos. What next, if he appears in a commercial and the tattoo is visible the tattoo artist is also entitled to compensation?
It looks like if you’re a professional athlete who likes tattoos you will need to sign a contract with your tattoo artist to make sure that you own the likeness of anything on your body. That’s idiotic.
This tattoo artist is what’s known as a copyright troll. https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2012/07/judge-copyright-troll-cant-bully-internet-subscriber-bogus-legal-theory
i found out about the huge amount of bogus copyrightclaims listeningto npr last wrrk. there’s people out there suing wifi cafes over their use of wifi. they bank on the conpany not being ablr to cover the enormous legal fees and pay for a license instead http://www.techdirt.com/blog/wireless/articles/20111001/00365416161/patent-troll-says-anyone-using-wifi-infringes-wont-sue-individuals-this-stage.shtml
Patent troll
Cruz
That is interesting. Although that is much different that the Condit case. The letter says Tyson agreed the tattoo artist would own the rights to it. We don’t have an agreement like this with Condit. More importantly this guy was suing because they out it on another actor. Like I said before I can under stand this. Even though I still think the guy is a scumbag. 90% of the people would be excited to have their work show up in a movie like that. Then there is the 10% who see it as a way to screw someone for their own personal gain. ALso I believe there have been a lot of parodies of that tattoo on TV. Wonder why nothing come about those? It would also seem they settled just to not over shadow the movie. Since the documents were filed just a month after the release date of the movie. It would have been interesting to see how this played out. But with WB using it on their promotional info like posters. Losing would have meant big bucks. Buying off a tattoo artist is probably relatively cheap.
I also bet that “rights to the tattoo” was buried in the waiver they make everyone sign but no one reads before getting a tattoo. I bet Tyson didn’t knowingly agree to those terms or aware of them.
“It’s a stretch to assume that including the tattoo in the game is a “for profit” use of the tattoo. The tattoo is only included in the game because it happens to be on Condit. The tattoo is irrelevant to the profits earned by the game manufacturers. ”
It doesn’t matter whether someone else’s work has a positive or negative influence on revenues for a commercial work, what matters is that it is being used in a commercial work. The infringer can’t claim fair-use or educational-use in a commercial work.
Despite BrainSmasher’s insult thrown my way, it would be best if he actually went to school or became a creative person himself and learned just how powerful the Copyright Act is and what the rules are. You are going to find a lot of settlements in the future for these tattoo cases. Definitely a bad risk to take it to trial.
To make it simple for you BS without going into crazy detail, if you have created a piece of original creative intellectual property, generally if there is no contract then the original creator retains all copyright. A person has to sign away their copyrights because due to the Copyright Act(s) of every western nation one is automatically protected when they create something. Before the Copyright Act(s), creative people were exploited ruthlessly. Now they generally at least have to sign a form to be ruthlessly exploited.
There is a good reason why major corporations don’t accept random submissions of any creative material and usually declare that all such unsolicited material is destroyed without opening it.
You may not like it, but what this guy is doing is far from frivolous.
Be that as it may. When it comes to being put on a person it changes things. You can not deny a person a right to make a living. Condits presence in that game and his compensation is very much a part of his living. It shouldn’t be denied which is exactly what would be happening if he asked for permission and it was not granted. That precedent should never be set. Like we have discussed already. If this is allowed then its a very small step for being able to not allow a person to work in public at all or hold many jobs. So now any actor, actress, model, athlete, or tv personality who has a tattoo has to be pulled from their job if they cant get the tattoo artist permission? That ridiculous and you know it. Soon it will be struck down in court when it is serious discussed. They will not open this can of worms.
Perpetuity is the word used in all Zuffa contracts that makes any legal mind nutz. Be it the TUF or general entry level 6&6 Fighter contract. All of us in truth understand that a UFC Fighter is more of an entertainer than an athlete from $$ perspective. The greatest entertainer draws the greatest rewards. No– No true professional entertainer would sign a contract that contains the word PERPETUITY. Are there any legal minds out there who can give us some clarity on this subject?
Dana white is a scumbag.