Celebrity tattoo artist Kat Von D has emerged victorious in a copyright lawsuit filed against her by photographer Jeffrey Sedlik. After just over two hours of deliberation, a Los Angeles jury found that Von D did not violate Sedlik's copyright when she used his portrait of jazz legend Miles Davis as the basis for a tattoo she inked on the arm of a friend.
Von D, known for her appearances on reality shows 'Miami Ink' and 'LA Ink,' expressed her relief outside the courtroom, stating, 'I'm obviously very happy for this to be over. It's been two years of a nightmare worrying about this, not just for myself but for my fellow tattoo artists.'
The jury also determined that the tattoo, as well as a drawing Von D made from the portrait and several social media posts about the process, fell within the legal doctrine of fair use of a copyrighted work. This verdict has been hailed as a resounding victory for Von D and other tattoo artists who supported her.
Von D's attorney, Allen B. Grodsky, spoke on behalf of his client, stating, 'We've said all along that this case never should have been brought. The jury recognized that this was just ridiculous.'
However, Sedlik's attorney, Robert Edward Allen, has expressed plans to appeal the decision. Allen argued that the images, both featuring a close-up of Davis making a 'shh' gesture, were so similar that he finds it difficult to understand how the jury reached their conclusion. 'If those two things are not substantially similar, then no one's art is safe,' Allen said.
Allen reiterated during closing arguments that the crux of the case was not about tattoos but about the copying of protected works. He emphasized the extensive efforts Sedlik put into the photoshoot, including setting up lighting, creating the desired mood, and positioning Davis to capture an iconic photo. Sedlik registered the copyright for the portrait in 1994 and subsequently licensed the image to various individuals, including tattoo artists, as a means of making a living.
On the other hand, Von D argued that she never licenses the images she recreates and considers her work, including the Miles Davis tattoo, as a form of 'fan art.' She testified that she made no profit from the tattoo and highlighted the difference between her art and mass production.
Grodsky emphasized to the jury that Von D's lack of attempt to commercialize the image was crucial to establishing the tattoo as fair use, which is an exception in copyright law for works used for commentary, criticism, and parody.
Allen countered by suggesting that Von D's social media posts about the tattoo were a means of promoting herself and her studio and, therefore, a form of monetizing the image.
Had the jury ruled in Sedlik's favor, they could have awarded him anywhere between a few hundred dollars to $150,000.
Kat Von D gained widespread recognition through her appearances on 'Miami Ink' and later as the central star of its spin-off, 'LA Ink.' Despite the favorable outcome, Von D revealed that her passion for tattooing has waned due to the hardships endured throughout the legal battle. She said, 'I think I don’t want to ever tattoo again, my heart has been crushed through this in different ways. We'll see with time.'
The verdict in this case holds significant implications for tattoo artists and the boundaries of fair use when it comes to adapting copyrighted works into their designs. The outcome provides clarity and reassurance for artists who have long incorporated various sources of inspiration into their work without infringing on copyright laws.
