I read the Prof's comment as a more long-winded version what Tau Henare said: "The tattooist moaning about the breach of copyright copied it off Maori. Bit rich to be claiming someone stole his 'design'."
It seems to me that the issue here is the tatooist laying claim to more than he created, and possibly getting away with it because a moko isn't something many people have seen in the US. In filing an injunction to try and stop a film's release he's just creating unnecessary bureaucratic bullshit to try and get a payout he doesn't deserve.
OMG.
What is wrong with you people?
And give us back them muskets and we might just reconsider the Foreshore deal.
you so wrong. He created the art. The moko, apart from the word, is not unique to the Maori, other races have facial tattoos and as one posted pointed out the curve pattern is often used in Celtic art, and whilst he may have got inspiration form the Maori the design and therefore copywrite is his. Why don't you check out what copywrite is.
It's the Maoris fault for not copyrighting their designs.
Do you mean this guy?
Anyway, I'm well aware of what a copyright is. I don't think Mike Tyson's tatoo is unique enough to be worthy of one or to fuck up the production of a movie. It's Maori-ness or otherwise has nothing to do with it IMHO.
Who invented copyright?![]()
And it's not a direct copy anyway, isn't the difference to avoid copyright stuff 10% or something? I mean, it's on a different guys face and everything, probably not even a real tattoo. Mind you I wouldn't be surprised if he was put up to it to get free publicity for the movie.
"A shark on whiskey is mighty risky, but a shark on beer is a beer engineer" - Tad Ghostal
Tattoos are cool......![]()
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Bookmarks