This guy really doesn't have much to go on here.  It'd be different if he trademarked that art.  It's like CM Punk of the WWE, in WWE games...he never sports the Pepsi logo in the game because obviously, Pepsi had that trade marked.

Good thing that an artist is standing up for his rights. A lot of people think "Well he paid for the tattoo, so now he owns it" and that is totally wrong. For example, just because someone at Microsoft bought a Chevy Silverado doesnt mean that they can use the truck for Forza Motorsport without paying Chevy for their copyright. The guy can show his tattoo whenever and wherever he goes but since it was designed by the tattoo artist, the artist owns the copyright on that design. So THQ cant use the design without paying the artist royalties.

Also all they have to do is release a patch that changes the tattoo a little that way it is not a replica of the real one, Like adding a cross in a corner or something. Laws can be worked around.

THQ just can't catch a break.

I have done freelance sketches for tattoo shops in my area and I'm with the artist on this one. Legally he owns the rights to the design not the work itself as the work is property of the person with the tattoo. Since THQ recreated his work in a fashion that excludes him fro credit for the design he has every right to sue. Tattoo artists should at least be credited in the game if their work is recreated and used in the final retail of a game.

This article is misleading.

At the top, it is labeled as "news".

Good for him. As far as i'm concerned that's theft

A lawsuit here, a lawsuit there, will it ever end?

That looks nothing like Condit lol

A tattoo is a permanent part of someone once it's applied. I could see the guy's point if the design wasn't actually on Carlos Condit's body, but it is.

This is the silliest lawsuit I've seen in a while.

As a tattoo artist myself, I cant speak for the laws in Arizona, but once your tat is out there (on the Internet, in the world) it is either the property of the customer, or as in this case with a publicly known figure it's public information & nolonger covered by copyright law. If anyone he should sue his client, who clearly provided THQ permission when he agreed to be in the game without informing them his tattoo artist has claims on his body/image & how it should (can be) used. I doubt very highly he has even a remote possibility of a strong case.

Also remember what happened with The Hangover 2 and the guy who designed Tyson's Tattoo?? Same thing

Hah! Weird. . .

That's dumb. Sure it's art, but it's on a person. Does the tattoo artist also own part of the guy's torso because he drew on it?

As if THQ isn't in a financial bind already...He has already been compensated for his artwork when the person that got the tattoo paid him...you don't hear Stone Cold Steve Austin suing Sony Santa Monica Studios over Kratos's likeness of his bald head...wake up please!!! It's not like people bought the game because of the tattoo...

As if THQ isn't in a financial bind already...He has already been compensated for his artwork when the person that got the tattoo paid him...you don't hear Stone Cold Steve Austin suing Sony Santa Monica Studios over Kratos's likeness of his bald head...wake up please!!! It's not like people bought the game because of the tattoo...

It is advertising you, idiot.

Hmmm, seems like a bit of a stretch.

That sucks for THQ.