Tattoo lawsuit won’t stop ‘Hangover II’ release

**Curt James** · 05-24-2011, 05:09 PM

Tattoo lawsuit won’t stop ‘Hangover II’ release

Posted: May 24, 2011, 3:33 pm ET

If you’ve got pre-gaming plans for the release of “The Hangover Part II,” don’t cancel them: The movie will head into theaters on Thursday without a hitch.

The movie’s opening wasn’t always so crystal clear, however, since the tattoo artist who gave Mike Tyson his memorable face art brought a lawsuit against Warner Bros. for copyright infringement at the end of April.

As seen in the trailer for “Hangover Part II,” actor Ed Helms wakes up to find similar ink on his face. The tattooist was seeking an injunction to halt the release of the highly-anticipated film, but that attempt was unsuccessful.

According to the Hollywood Reporter, a judge presiding over the case declined to stop “Hangover II’s” release, although the case will move forward.

On Monday, two Warner Bros. execs testified in the federal court hearing, claiming that the injunction would cause “irreparable harm” since the studio’s already dropped $80 million to market the movie.

THR reported that same day that “The Hangover Part II” is tracking to bring in more than $100 million at the U.S. box office during its opening weekend. The judge noted that while an injunction would cause too much stress on the studio and the movie theaters planning to screen the movie this weekend, Whitmill does have “a strong likelihood of succeeding on the merits of this case.”
Warner Bros. said in a statement, “We are very gratified by the Court’s decision which will allow the highly anticipated film, ‘The Hangover Part II’ to be released on schedule this week around the world. Plaintiff’s failed attempt to enjoin the film in order to try and extract a massive settlement payment from Warner Bros. was highly inappropriate and unwarranted.”

From CNN.com

**Zaphod** · 05-24-2011, 05:12 PM

Dude couldn't cash in on Mike Tyson so now he's trying to cash in on a movie. Sad sad sad.

**Curt James** · 05-24-2011, 05:13 PM

**Curt James** · 05-24-2011, 05:16 PM

Originally Posted by Zaphod

Dude couldn't cash in on Mike Tyson so now he's trying to cash in on a movie. Sad sad sad.

That tattoo artist has unrealistic expectations if he thinks he can take on freaking WARNER BROTHERS in a lawsuit.

What, eight million high-priced lawyers versus Fred the tattoo artist?

Good luck, pal.

**Curt James** · 05-24-2011, 05:22 PM

Mike interviewed about his tattoo:

**ihateschoolmt** · 05-24-2011, 05:23 PM

What a [expletive deleted] anyways. People sue for such bullshit, it's not like they made any money from that dumb-ass design. If you sue for a ridiculous reason you should have to give all your money to the other person. Or me since I thought of the idea. Instant stop to frivolous law suits.

**Curt James** · 05-24-2011, 05:27 PM

Mike Tyson's Tattoo Artist Fails to Stop 'Hangover 2' With Lawsuit

By Jo Piazza
Posted May 24th 2011 10:00AM

The man who designed Mike Tyson's distinctive tribal face tattoo is suing Warner Brothers Entertainment for copyright infringement over the use of a similar piece of body art in 'The Hangover Part II,' on the face of actor Ed Helms.

The artist, S. Victor Whitmill, claims in his lawsuit that he was never "asked for permission for, and has never consented to, the use, reproduction or creation of a derivative work based on his original tattoo," and is looking to siphon cash from the studio and delay this weekend's opening of the flick.

Those of you planning your Memorial Day festivities around a funny visit to the cineplex should have no fear -- legal experts tell PopEater the show should go on as planned.

The case hinges on the fact that the tattoo is clearly being used as a parody of Tyson's.

"Using the tattoo in the movie is simply part of the joke. It is also transformative in that it makes use of the tattoo in a scene where it adds value to the meaning of the original design," explains attorney Joey Jackson. "The show will go on as no court will order an injunction."

Still, because Whitmill did file a copyright for the tattoo (albeit in April 2011, with obvious aims to collect from the film), Warner will probably be forced into some kind of settlement with the tattoo artist.

"These matters have settled in the past. I believe Rasheed Wallace's tattoo artist successfully settled a copyright infringement suit against the NBA when the tattoo appeared in their ads," entertainment attorney Yemi Adegbonmire told us. Regarding a settlement in the 'Hangover' case, Adegbonmire added, "Here I would imagine that the court will lean in favor
of the copyright holder for a few reasons: First, the design is registered. That should give a savvy party like a studio notice as to the artist's intent to protect his work."

The original 'Hangover' grossed over $466 million globally. In order to keep this guy out of their hair, it would make sense for Warner just to throw him a mil to keep his mouth shut.

From Mike Tyson's Tattoo Artist Fails to Stop 'Hangover 2' With Lawsuit | PopEater.com

**Curt James** · 05-24-2011, 05:28 PM

^^^^ Looks like the tattoo artist made a bucks-making decision.

**Fit_Qtie** · 05-24-2011, 05:32 PM

Movie looks funny !

**blazeftp** · 05-24-2011, 05:33 PM

Wasn't Mike Tyson in the first one ?
Mike Tyson payed the artiest for the tattoo and design.
So its really his call.

**Fit_Qtie** · 05-24-2011, 05:36 PM

Originally Posted by blazeftp

Wasn't Mike Tyson in the first one ?
Mike Tyson payed the artiest for the tattoo and design.
So its really his call.

Yeap he was.

**Curt James** · 05-24-2011, 05:36 PM

**Curt James** · 05-24-2011, 05:36 PM

**Curt James** · 05-24-2011, 05:55 PM

Originally Posted by ihateschoolmt

People sue for such bullshit

It's definitely a different mindset. This get rich quick philosophy.

But it's not entirely idiotic either. The artist gets cash from Warner Brothers that I suspect he'd never receive working as a tattoo artist.

Is it morally wrong? Financially efficient?

Back in 1983 or 1984 I was stationed at Fort Benjamin Harrison as a student while serving in the Navy. Was walking to school, it was snowing, there was a crosswalk and I was (gently) hit by a car. I was up on the hood, the driver stopped short, I slid off the hood and onto the street. Picked myself up and gave the driver the finger and went on my merry way.

Didn't stop to chat because immediately I thought, "What if it's an officer? And I just flipped him the bird?"

Months later I'm on my ship and the chief tells a story about his brother or brother-in-law who was paid $30K or $35K for a similiar incident, only the family member did a "Ow, my neck!" deal instead of walking away from the accident.

Did I do the right thing or was I naive and walked away from a payday? I'd like to think I did the right thing. That I wasn't "raised that way" (to pursue those frivolous lawsuits), however that phrase, "Nice guys finish last" seems to apply as well. lol

**maniclion** · 05-24-2011, 07:22 PM

He filed a copyright in April 2011....

When did this film start production, was the tattoo in question worked into the Script before that date...

If he gets one cent out of this I will sue our justice system for letting him get away with such a blatant attempt to milk his little tribal sketch for more than it's worth.....

Maybe the Maori should club his ass to death for copying their culture, those shark tooth clubs looking like they'll leave some marks he can keep for life as well.....

Doesn't anyone appreciate free advertising anymore? If I heard one of my poems read in a popular movie I'd be beaming with pride and telling people "Hey you know that part in that movie when they read that awesome poem....I wrote that!"

**jhud25** · 05-30-2011, 06:54 AM

this is totally stupid

**Bigbully100678** · 05-30-2011, 08:38 AM

Originally Posted by Curt James

It's definitely a different mindset. This get rich quick philosophy.

But it's not entirely idiotic either. The artist gets cash from Warner Brothers that I suspect he'd never receive working as a tattoo artist.

Is it morally wrong? Financially efficient?

Back in 1983 or 1984 I was stationed at Fort Benjamin Harrison as a student while serving in the Navy. Was walking to school, it was snowing, there was a crosswalk and I was (gently) hit by a car. I was up on the hood, the driver stopped short, I slid off the hood and onto the street. Picked myself up and gave the driver the finger and went on my merry way.

Didn't stop to chat because immediately I thought, "What if it's an officer? And I just flipped him the bird?"

Months later I'm on my ship and the chief tells a story about his brother or brother-in-law who was paid $30K or $35K for a similiar incident, only the family member did a "Ow, my neck!" deal instead of walking away from the accident.

Did I do the right thing or was I naive and walked away from a payday? I'd like to think I did the right thing. That I wasn't "raised that way" (to pursue those frivolous lawsuits), however that phrase, "Nice guys finish last" seems to apply as well. lol

You probably could have been the "tweener" guy and only asked for 15-17.5K Lol

By the way, this movie is a must see for anyone who hasn't seen it. I would dare to say it could be better than the first.

**smooth915** · 05-31-2011, 01:57 PM

just trying to get paid for doing nothing...

**Acee** · 06-07-2011, 10:53 AM

Just watched this film, well worth a watch, funny

Thread: Tattoo lawsuit won’t stop ‘Hangover II’ release

Thread Tools

Display

Tattoo lawsuit won’t stop ‘Hangover II’ release

Similar Threads

Hangover 2

hangover remedies

Stop demeaning work conditions! Stop torture! Stop plush toys labor!

hangover - sex connection

Posting Permissions