Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Athletes Don’t Own Their Tattoos – a Problem for Video Game Developers

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 90 posts

Re: Athletes Don’t Own Their Tattoos – a Problem for Video Game Developers

#71

Post by PurpleBoxDragon »

alasdair_ wrote: post #67
PurpleBoxDragon wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not just copyright law. Look at the difference in laws being recording a video of a person and recording sound of the same person. I would love for law to be consistent, but as of yet there is no such requirement.

For more headfuckery, try to work out if you can record a video of the soundwaves.

You can. You record a high definition video of items and can possibly determine the sound waves from the movement of the items. I've already seen demos of this tech where you can restore the majority of a transcript of a visually recorded conversation.

Re: Athletes Don’t Own Their Tattoos – a Problem for Video Game Developers

#72

Post by aidenn0 »

PurpleBoxDragon wrote: post #71
alasdair_ wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For more headfuckery, try to work out if you can record a video of the soundwaves.

You can. You record a high definition video of items and can possibly determine the sound waves from the movement of the items. I've already seen demos of this tech where you can restore the majority of a transcript of a visually recorded conversation.

You technically can, but then it becomes illegal in most states.

Re: Athletes Don’t Own Their Tattoos – a Problem for Video Game Developers

#73

Post by xte »

dang wrote: post #64
xte wrote: post #36

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA Welcome in post-capitalistic absurd world. End there are still some people who say "hey we are in a free market"...

Could you please stop posting unsubstantive comments to Hacker News? Especially the flamebait kind. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18770963 also breaks the site guidelines. If you could please review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and follow the rules when posting here, we'd be grateful.

I do not notice that space at the beginning of the line act like a pre tag. Sorry for that. For the rest I do not think having posted anything more "flamebait" than the article itself and certainly not violating any site guideline.

Few times I use all capitals to emphasis a single world more than simple '' or '_', veeeery rarely I use all caps for very few worlds as I do in the real world when I civilly and polity I raise my voice a little bit.

I do not* find that nor impolite nor flamebait. Also to my European eye certain kind of news like "copyrighted tattoos" sound really a joke. I understand that the world is vary so something normal in a country may not be normal in another, and I do my best in general to respect others, as others respect me.

I do not think HN is a diplomat discussion platforms like G7 o similar high-level meetings so I assume that in any country of the world, on a formally free speech platform, especially if it's named after Hacker cultures, one of the most free modern cultures we have seen in human history certain kind of relaxed expressions are ok.

I do not buy the idea to be all silent, to ban all "strong" concepts, to say that anything is ok etc typical of certain dictatorial regimes. Hacker culture is free and remain free even on a proprietary platform with certainly not free communication model by it's nature.

Also I do not see anything disturbing in remark how certain kind of use of "gamification" are not proper to a free culture nor can be considered positive or kind.

Re: Athletes Don’t Own Their Tattoos – a Problem for Video Game Developers

#75

Post by gambiting »

giancarlostoro wrote: post #26
wmil wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because you aren't copying it. First sale doctrine, you're allowed to resell your copy.

Ah right, so it would only be an issue if I were to start selling copies of the painting that I forged, stole or something.

No, what's happening here is the same as if you had a painting in your house, but for some reason pictures of your house were very popular and seen by millions of people - and they all included the painting. You never made a copy of the painting, but it's now featured on a lot of different media that the original author never agreed to.

I still think it's BS, the tattoo on your body is YOU - not a separate thing to you.

Re: Athletes Don’t Own Their Tattoos – a Problem for Video Game Developers

#76

Post by dragonwriter »

wccrawford wrote: post #5

"Lawyers generally agree that an implied license allows people to freely display their tattoos in public, including on television broadcasts or magazine covers. " Seems to me that the digital representation of someone is just another way of displaying themselves. If it's legal to do it in photos and videos, it's legal to do it in 3D models. But even without that, I think it's unethical to claim ownership to any part…

> But even without that, I think it's unethical to claim ownership to any part of someone else's body and tell them what they can and can't do with it.

No one's claiming ownership of the athletes body (because, first sale doctrine.) If they want to cut their skin off and sell the tattoo, that's not an issue.

Ownership of the copyright on the tattoo is not ownership of any part of the athlete's body.

Re: Athletes Don’t Own Their Tattoos – a Problem for Video Game Developers

#77

Post by mnm1 »

By this line of reasoning, companies don't own the code their engineers write either. Art collectors don't own the art they paid for. Etc. What a bunch of bullshit. Have these people not heard of work for hire? The artists were paid for their copyright (in addition to the actual manual work). They no longer own the copyright. That's the whole point of the transaction. That's the only reason money was exchanged. No one in their right mind would get a tattoo they couldn't display; something the artist could really demand if they held the copyright. Does something this obvious seriously need litigation? That is some serious misinterpretation of copyright law. As bad as our copyright laws are, they can't possibly be this bad to allow these obviously bullshit cases to stand, can they?

Re: Athletes Don’t Own Their Tattoos – a Problem for Video Game Developers

#78

Post by dorchadas »

kbsletten wrote: post #55
cryptonector wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A tattoo artist doing this seems to me to be a good way to damage that artist's reputation. Why get a tattoo from an artist who has demonstrated willingness to sue over representations of you??

From the article, the artists claim that they were approached by a firm to buy the copyright to the tattoos for a clothing line and then once the deal was done, the firm went after 2K, they say they didn't actually intend for this to happen, and they don't own the copyright anymore.

So basically the firm acted really scummy, and probably intended to go after 2k the entire time, but sold it to the artists as 'clothing line'...Is anyone really surprised?

Re: Athletes Don’t Own Their Tattoos – a Problem for Video Game Developers

#79

Post by ineedasername »

It seems like it might be a gray area (and, unfortunately as such, something the courts need to resolve) but it's disappointing that NYT did not at least broach the topic and possible applicability of the Work for Hire exception.

Re: Athletes Don’t Own Their Tattoos – a Problem for Video Game Developers

#80

Post by jkim1258 »

PurpleBoxDragon wrote: post #54
wycs wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s almost like intellectual property is an absurd injustice.

Especially since it escapes taxation. If you taxed IP like you do real property, we would see quite a different system form.

Income generated from IP, such as licensing fees, do get taxed, though. Are you referring to the lack of excise-like taxes on IP?
Post reply on HN