Matthew Reed is suing Rasheed Wallace and Nike for featuring a tattoo he created in an ad without his permission.
Matthew Reed from TigerLilly Tattoo and DesignWorks claims he owns the copyright for the design of the tattoo. Reed's lawsuit wants the Nike ad featuring Wallace and the tattoo off the air and the Internet, as well as damages. ...But Reed claims he became aware last year of a Nike ad that centers on the tattoo and its creation. He claims the ad violates the copyright he holds to "the Egyptian Family Pencil Drawing."
Apparently, the tattoo doesn't just appear in the ad, it's the center of the ad. As such, I think the artist deserves some compensation or credit.
SIR I WANT TO WHAT ABOUT TO KONW IN CHRISTIN HISTRY FOR IMAM HUSSAIN .AND IN DETAIL SHAHDAT HUSSAIN.
Don't be ridiculous. It's Mr. Wallace's arm -- he owns all the rights to that particular tattoo. That one -- the one permanently engraved on his arm by Mr. Reed -- not "the design" whatever that means.
Face it -- Nike would have hired Wallace with or without that or any other tattoo on his arm. Likewise, they would not have hired me or anyone else, simply because we sported a bit of Reed's artwork.
Hmmm. I think I'll buy used nike ads and logos and merchandise, or overstocks, and embed them in custom fashion toilet bowls to be sold at a gallery. In theory, I bought their shoes. No one said I had to WEAR them.
Copyright's gone too far. BTW it's unconstitutional.
1st amendment vs. HAPPY BIRTHDAY.
http://www.unhappybirthday.com