Perzanowski (2017)

From Copyright EVIDENCE

Advertising Architectural Publishing of books, periodicals and other publishing Programming and broadcasting Computer programming Computer consultancy Creative, arts and entertainment Cultural education

Film and motion pictures Sound recording and music publishing Photographic activities PR and communication Software publishing (including video games) Specialised design Television programmes Translation and interpretation

1. Relationship between protection (subject matter/term/scope) and supply/economic development/growth/welfare 2. Relationship between creative process and protection - what motivates creators (e.g. attribution; control; remuneration; time allocation)? 3. Harmony of interest assumption between authors and publishers (creators and producers/investors) 4. Effects of protection on industry structure (e.g. oligopolies; competition; economics of superstars; business models; technology adoption) 5. Understanding consumption/use (e.g. determinants of unlawful behaviour; user-generated content; social media)

A. Nature and Scope of exclusive rights (hyperlinking/browsing; reproduction right) B. Exceptions (distinguish innovation and public policy purposes; open-ended/closed list; commercial/non-commercial distinction) C. Mass digitisation/orphan works (non-use; extended collective licensing) D. Licensing and Business models (collecting societies; meta data; exchanges/hubs; windowing; crossborder availability) E. Fair remuneration (levies; copyright contracts) F. Enforcement (quantifying infringement; criminal sanctions; intermediary liability; graduated response; litigation and court data; commercial/non-commercial distinction; education and awareness)

Source Details

Perzanowski (2017)
Title: wning the Body: Creative Norms in the Tattoo Industry
Author(s): Perzanowski, A.
Year: 2017
Citation: Perzanowski, A., 'Owning the Body: Creative Norms in the Tattoo Industry', in Darling, K. and Perzanowski, A. (eds.), Creativity Without Law: Challenging the Assumptions of Intellectual Property, New York University Press, New York, 2017, pp. 208–276.
Link(s): Definitive
Key Related Studies:
Discipline:
Linked by:
About the Data
Data Description: Data were obtained from interviews with fourteen tattoo artists based in the United States.
Data Type: Primary data
Secondary Data Sources:
Data Collection Methods:
Data Analysis Methods:
Industry(ies):
Country(ies):
Cross Country Study?: No
Comparative Study?: No
Literature review?: No
Government or policy study?: No
Time Period(s) of Collection:
  • 2012
Funder(s):

Abstract

“Aaron Perzanowski’s research on the tattoo industry provides one illustration of this phenomenon. Despite generating billions of dollars in annual revenue, the tattoo industry rarely relies on formal assertions of legal rights in disputes over copying or ownership of the creative works. Instead, tattooing is governed by a set of nuanced, overlapping, and occasionally contradictory social norms enforced through informal sanctions. But tattoo artists opt for self-governance despite the fact that their creations fit comfortably within the scope of copyright protection. This chapter offers a descriptive account, drawn from qualitative interview data, of the social norms that have overshadowed formal law within the tattoo community. It also provides a set of complementary cultural and economic explanations for the development of those norms.”

Main Results of the Study

• Even where tattoos can be protected by copyright, this protection is rejected by the tattoo artist community. The study frames the tattoo community as countercultural, with a strong scepticism of the legal system. For example, there are concerns within the community that if enforcement measures are pursued, this may draw unwanted attention from copyright owners of e.g., third party tattoo content.
• There is a strong norm in the community about the sanctity of a client’s body and their ownership of a tattoo, rather than a tattoo artist’s ownership. This norm does not apply when the tattoo is disconnected from the body and placed in other formats such as e.g., virtual games.
• Rules against copying in the tattoo industry are unclear. There is a strong norm against literal copying of custom designs, but an agreement that the borrowing of concepts and abstract ideas is acceptable.
• When intra-community norms are breached, the community responds through: inaction; direct communication with the copyist, or; negative gossip/public shaming/blacklisting of the copyist.

Policy Implications as Stated By Author

The study does not make any explicit policy recommendations.


Coverage of Study

Coverage of Fundamental Issues
Issue Included within Study
Relationship between protection (subject matter/term/scope) and supply/economic development/growth/welfare
Green-tick.png
Relationship between creative process and protection - what motivates creators (e.g. attribution; control; remuneration; time allocation)?
Harmony of interest assumption between authors and publishers (creators and producers/investors)
Effects of protection on industry structure (e.g. oligopolies; competition; economics of superstars; business models; technology adoption)
Understanding consumption/use (e.g. determinants of unlawful behaviour; user-generated content; social media)
Coverage of Evidence Based Policies
Issue Included within Study
Nature and Scope of exclusive rights (hyperlinking/browsing; reproduction right)
Green-tick.png
Exceptions (distinguish innovation and public policy purposes; open-ended/closed list; commercial/non-commercial distinction)
Mass digitisation/orphan works (non-use; extended collective licensing)
Licensing and Business models (collecting societies; meta data; exchanges/hubs; windowing; crossborder availability)
Fair remuneration (levies; copyright contracts)
Enforcement (quantifying infringement; criminal sanctions; intermediary liability; graduated response; litigation and court data; commercial/non-commercial distinction; education and awareness)
Green-tick.png

Datasets

Sample size: 14
Level of aggregation: Individual
Period of material under study: 2012