A jury discovered Friday that celeb tattoo artist Kat Von D didn’t violate a photographer’s copyright when she used his portrait of Miles Davis as the idea for a tattoo she placed on the arm of a buddy.

The Los Angeles jury deliberated for simply over two hours earlier than deciding that the tattoo by the previous star of the truth reveals “Miami Ink” and “LA Ink” was not related sufficient to photographer Jeffrey Sedlik’s 1989 portrait of the jazz legend that she wanted to have paid permission.

“I’m obviously very happy for this to be over,” Von D, who inked her buddy’s arm with Davis as a present about seven years in the past, mentioned exterior the courtroom. “It’s been two years of a nightmare worrying about this, not just for myself but for my fellow tattoo artists.”

The eight jurors made the identical determination a few drawing Von D created from the portrait to base the tattoo on, and to a number of social media posts she made in regards to the course of, which have been additionally a part of Sedlik’s lawsuit. They usually discovered that the tattoo, drawing and posts additionally all fell inside the authorized doctrine of truthful use of a copyrighted work, giving Von D and different tattoo artists who supported her and adopted the trial a convincing across-the-board victory.

“We’ve said all along that this case never should have been brought,” Von D’s legal professional Allen B. Grodsky mentioned after the decision. “The jury recognized that this was just ridiculous.”

Sedlik’s legal professional Robert Edward Allen mentioned they plan to enchantment. He mentioned it the pictures, which each featured a close-up of Davis gazing towards the viewer and making a “shh” gesture, have been so related he didn’t know the way the jury might attain the conclusion they did.

“If those two things are not substantially similar, then no one’s art is safe,” Allen mentioned.

He instructed jurors throughout closing arguments earlier Friday that the case has “nothing to do with tattoos.”

“It’s about copying others’ protected works,” Allen mentioned. “It’s not going to hurt the tattoo industry. The tattoo police are not going to come after anyone.”

Allen emphasised the meticulous work Sedlik did to arrange the shoot, to create the lighting and temper, and to place Davis within the pose that may make for an iconic photograph that was first printed on the quilt of JAZZIZ journal in 1989. Sedlik registered the copyright in 1994.

And he mentioned that subsequently, licensing the picture to others together with tattoo artists was a serious a part of how he made his residing.

Von D mentioned in the course of the three-day trial that she by no means licenses the pictures she recreates, and she or he considers work just like the Davis tattoo a type of “fan art.”

“I made zero money off it,” she testified. “I’m not mass-producing anything. I think there is a big difference.”

Her legal professional Grodsky emphasised for jurors that that lack of an try and money in on the picture was important to the tattoo being a type of truthful use, an exception in copyright legislation used for works together with commentary, criticism and parody.

Allen argued in his closing that the social media posts in regards to the tattoo have been a promotion of her and her studio, and thus a type of monetizing the picture.

If jurors had sided with Sedlik, they may have awarded him as little as a number of hundred {dollars} or as a lot as $150,000.

Von D was among the many stars of the truth collection “Miami Ink” then was the featured artist on its spinoff “LA Ink,” which ran on TLC from 2007 to 2011.

The 41-year-old Von D, whose authorized title is Katherine von Drachenberg, was already a distinguished younger tattoo artist when she grew to become a TV character by her appearances on TLC’s “Miami Ink” beginning in 2005 on TLC. She was the central star of its spinoff, “LA Ink,” which ran from 2007 to 2011 and made her probably probably the most well-known tattoo artist within the nation.

Von D mentioned that regardless of the victory, she’s not enthused about getting again to work.

“I think I don’t want to ever tattoo again, my heart has been crushed through this in different ways,” she mentioned. “We’ll see with time.”