Kat Von D won a legal battle accusing her of copyright infringement, but the celebrity tattoo artist said the experience has made her reluctant to continue her trade.
“I think I don’t want to ever tattoo again,” Kat Von D said after the verdict, the Los Angeles Times reported. “My heart has been crushed through this in different ways. We’ll see with time.”
Kat Von D was accused of copyright infringement after inking a replica of Jeff Sedlik’s iconic Miles Davis portrait on a client’s body and posting it on social media. A jury ruled the celebrity tattoo artist did not violate copyright law on Jan. 26 in Los Angeles. (Courtesy: From court filing exhibit)
Professional photographer and college professor Jeff Sedlik in February 2021 filed a lawsuit against Von D, whose given name is Katherine Von Drachenberg, accusing the celebrity of copyright infringement for tattooing a rendition of his famed Miles Davis portrait on a friend’s arm in 2017 and posting photos on her Instagram page with almost 10 million followers. But the yearslong legal battle ended Jan. 26 when a jury unanimously ruled in Von D’s favor.
“I’m obviously very happy for this to be over,” Von D told reporters outside the courtroom. “It’s been two years of a nightmare worrying about this, not just for myself but for my fellow tattoo artists.”
MARIAH CAREY FACING $20M LAWSUIT OVER ‘ALL I WANT FOR CHRISTMAS IS YOU’
California photographer Jeff Sedlik sued Katherine Von Drachenberg, better known as Kat Von D, for copyright infringement after the celebrity tattoo artist inked a rendition of his iconic 1989 portrait of Miles Davis on a client. The famous tattoo artist told reporters the experience has “crushed” her heart and made her reluctant to give tattoos again, despite the jury ruling in her favor in January. (Getty Images)
In the lawsuit, Sedlik had accused the celebrity tattoo artist, who starred in LA Ink and Miami Ink, for “unlawful and unauthorized reproductions” of his image on a client and displaying it on various social media accounts to promote her businesses and brand. Von D’s March 2017 Instagram post showing the tattoo and her line drawings of the portrait included a caption that read “Can’t believe this is the first time I’ve gotten to tattoo a portrait of #MilesDavis! [thank you, Blake for letting me tattoo you!]” and tagged Von D’s former business, High Voltage Tattoo, which has since closed down.
COPYRIGHT BOARD DELIVERS BLOW TO ‘TERMINATOR’ TECH OVER PHOTO PROTECTIONS
The eight jurors agreed Von D’s drawing was not similar enough to Sedlik’s iconic 1989 portrait of the famed jazz musician to need paid permission, the Associated Press reported. They found that Von D’s tattoo rendition, line drawings of the portrait and social posts featuring the artwork all fell within the fair use doctrine of copyrighted material, which allows for unlicensed use of copyrighted materials in certain circumstances.
Celebrity tattoo artist Kat Von D gained national attention after becoming the plaintiff in a copyright case. The jury ruled that Von D did not violate copyright law on Jan. 26. (Rosdiana Ciaravolo/Getty Images)
The ruling came on the heels of a Supreme Court case regarding the fair use doctrine. Last May, the court ruled in favor of Lynn Goldsmith, a photographer who accused the Andy Warhol Foundation of re-creating her 1981 photos of superstar musician Prince without permission.
Von D’s attorney, Allen B. Grodsky, said the suit against the tattoo artist should never have been filed.
In May 2023, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of Lynn Goldsmith, a photographer who accused the Andy Warhol Foundation of using her 1981 photos of Prince for renditions without her permission. (Courtesy: From court filing exhibit)
“We are very pleased that the jury saw this as the meritless case that it was,” Grodsky told Fox News in a statement Thursday. “This lawsuit should never have been filed and thank goodness Kat was willing to stand up on behalf of tattoo artists and the tattoo industry to fight this obvious money grab.”
CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP
But Sedlik’s attorney, Robert Allen, said his client plans to repeal the verdict, The New York Times reported. Allen said during closing arguments if the two images weren’t “substantially similar” to the jurors, then no one’s art was safe.
“It’s about copying others’ protected works,” Allen said during closing arguments. “It’s not going to hurt the tattoo industry. The tattoo police are not going to come after anyone.”
Allen did not respond to Fox News’ requests for comment.
