Battle over "Hangover 2" tattoo could hault release?

I saw this on the news and laughed that it even made it to federal court!

Warners president of worldwide marketing Sue Kroll and president of domestic distribution Dan Fellman both took the stand in St. Louis federal court where S. Victor Whitmill is seeking an injunction on the grounds that the facial tattoo worn in the film by Ed Helms violates a copyright in the original work Whitmill created for Tyson.

I didn't know you could copyright tattoos! Also he had the tattoo in the first one, why is this guy all pissy now?!

IMO people in this country are too greedy and wherever they can see a lawsuit they file one. This country allows useless lawsuits like this and IMO it's just stupid. I don't believe in suing for every little thing and why is this an issue days before it is to be released?

Whitmill, who designed the tattoo on Tyson's face, filed suit April 28 claiming copyright infringement and asking for an injunction. Whitmill was the sole witness in support of his case at Monday's hearing before U.S. District Court Judge

I know I am looking forward to the sequel, the first was hilarious! I hope they work all this out so it will be released this week. I don't think this will stop it, the studios have the big bucks!

Thoughts?

source



Ahhh ok, now they mention more on the news. It's not Mike Tyson who has it, it's another actor in the movie who gets it in the movie...


Still it's stupid and pointless! He should take it as a compliment, but NO this is America people want money for everything and anything they can file a lawsuit on.

just another example of the downward spiral humanity is on.

this is of no surprise coming out of the U.S.

(you spell your words how you pronounce them)

Originally posted by JohnySeagull
just another example of the downward spiral humanity is on.

this is of no surprise coming out of the U.S.

Agreed!!

When I saw it on the news I was like "really!" It's a senseless lawsuit imo.

It's always about money..

I thought the issue was not with the tattoo being in the movie, but that someone drew a copy on the actors face.

It's not the tat being in the movie, so tyson wouldn't have been the problem, it's copying it on someone not tyson.

And I agree, it's stupid... like, really really stupid.

Buuut then people can copyright genetics...

Now... If how im reading this is right, and they make a fake tattoo, or cgi'd it onto Ed Helms face, it could be copyright infringement... Because you .. (heres the kicker) copied it. See how that works? Copying someone elses work, is protected with something called copyrights. The reason, is to protect the creator or the item/object/tattoo from being copied, and stolen. If you created somethin, you copyright it. If someone uses it without your permission, its a violation, and they owe you money. This is a good thing. Prevents things like a movie company copying your art work without your permission. You see how he hs the right to file suit?

Actually he didn't have that tattoo in the first one. I know this because I just watched it after the millionth person said to me "you have to see it!" You can't argue with those kinds of peer presure.

On topic I hope this gets laughed out of court because this is sooo rediculous. Obviously the artist is just being extremely opertunistic here. I imagine hundreds of people have that tattoo and maybe even a few before Tyson.

Originally posted by badw0lf
I thought the issue was not with the tattoo being in the movie, but that someone drew a copy on the actors face.

It's not the tat being in the movie, so tyson wouldn't have been the problem, it's copying it on someone not tyson.

And I agree, it's stupid... like, really really stupid.

Buuut then people can copyright genetics...

Yeah I just saw that on the news..Explains the confusion in chat.

One of the other guys in the movie gets one like Mike's on his face in the movie..That is what he is all pissy about, still I think it's stupid!


They didn't mention that on the news, they made it seem like the guy was mad Mike Tyson was in it again with it. Oh well..stupid still!

reply to post by benjoepen


having a free hand, or original tattoo that looks like the same is ok.. But once again, if you copy it to be just like tysons.. It is copyright infringement. Because you didnt create it, you copied it. Anyone can try to create the same one, just cant trace it, scan it, photo it, cgi it... A whole list..

Originally posted by benjoepen
Actually he didn't have that tattoo in the first one. I know this because I just watched it after the millionth person said to me "you have to see it!" You can't argue with those kinds of peer presure.

On topic I hope this gets laughed out of court because this is sooo rediculous. Obviously the artist is just being extremely opertunistic here. I imagine hundreds of people have that tattoo and maybe even a few before Tyson.

Actually yes he did. He has that tattoo on his face for about 10 yrs. It isn't new.

I hope it does as well! It just shows how greedy people are here. If judges threw this kind of crap out of court more often there would be less stupid lawsuits, BUT you have sleazy lawyers who love this kind of stuff...I could never be a lawyer lol

Originally posted by Myendica
Now... If how im reading this is right, and they make a fake tattoo, or cgi'd it onto Ed Helms face, it could be copyright infringement... Because you .. (heres the kicker) copied it. See how that works? Copying someone elses work, is protected with something called copyrights. The reason, is to protect the creator or the item/object/tattoo from being copied, and stolen. If you created somethin, you copyright it. If someone uses it without your permission, its a violation, and they owe you money. This is a good thing. Prevents things like a movie company copying your art work without your permission. You see how he hs the right to file suit?

I see your point but I still think it's ridiculous.

If I were that artist I'd be embarrassed because that tattoo is crap imo. I have seen much better tribal work, he just sees money signs.

Sad that people are like this. I'd take it as a compliment, but no he wants money. I am sure he will get some just to shut him up so the movie can be released.

Ed Helms, is that the guy in the movie with the glasses who they give the tattoo?

Personally I can't wait to see this one lol It looks funny!

I just wish people weren't so greedy.

reply to post by mblahnikluver


whats ridiculous is that the movie execs think they can copy artwork without pernission. All they had to do was ask, and pay a small fee.. Now they'll lose a large chunk of profits.. Idiots

This is quite ridiculous, I was hoping to see this on Thursday, I guess I'll have to wait then.

reply to post by mblahnikluver


i think it is stupid.. Try stay ontopic...but this isnt.. But is ur alien giving the finger? Hahahahhha

Ridiculous lawsuit but then again, crappy movie too. The first one sucked so yeah, avoiding this like the tattoo artist should've avoided taking this to the courts.

The first film made over 400 million dollars. I think they could throw something this guys way. They paid everyone else in the movie.

I hate frivolous lawsuits, but when it comes to taking money from mega corporations, I say take all you can get.

If he actually has the coryright documents for it then fair play.

It is petty though, if it was mine I would at least ask for some kind of advertising so people would know it's my design and can come and get it done.

Didn't seem to halt release.

SPOILER ALERT!




And no worries about Tyson being upset by it (if you see the film, you'll know what I mean here). His cameo in this movie is unbelievable....

It was a very funny movie, not as good as the first, but it will still be the funniest thing you see this year, I'm betting.