Nimmer Part 1

8/6/2019 Nimmer Part 1

1/14

Case: 4:11-cv-00752-CDP Doc. #: 29-6 Filed: 05/20/11 Page: 1 of 14 PageID #: 320


2/14



3/14



4/14



5/14



6/14



7/14



8/14



9/14



10/14



11/14



12/14



13/14



14/14

as the "medium of expression" that Congress intended to allow as the substrate to securecopyright protection, copyright protection still must be denied to tattoos.E.ffect of Copyright in Artwork on Tattoos

49.laintiff W hitmill inked the subject image in this case directly onto Mike Ty son.The discussion set forth above has considered the precise circum stances of this case. But it isalso worth exploring what this case is not. The instant claim differs fundamentally from oneinvolving creation by an a rtist of an image, such as the on e portrayed in Figure 6:Figure 6Ferocity

50. That painting is a pictorial work. Assuming it results from original expression (asopposed to being copied from antecedent sources), then Figure 6 may qualify for copyrightprotection. That painting is wholly separate from anyone's body. It therefore poses none of theinvidious consequences catalogued above.

51. A different case w ould arise to the extent that a tattooist first created an image asa template, before inking the subject individual. Even in that case, however, the image wouldgive the tattooist no right to control application of that same image to other individuals, for thereasons set forth below.

- 13 -


Nimmer Part 1

Documents

Transcript of Nimmer Part 1