Other issues that arise in the body art industry involve copyright laws. As custom tattoos have become more common, tattoo professionals are finding that they need to protect their work from being copied by others. To do so, they can register their work with the U.S. Copyright Office. A tattoo artist who illegally copies a copyrighted tattoo can be sued for damages by the original artist.

Despite the fact that a copyright would protect their work, not all body artists believe that copyrighting is a good idea. Certain body art professionals, such as tattooist Pat Fish, believe that the industry should self-regulate because having outsiders, such as lawyers, interfere could result in an atmosphere of distrust. Nevertheless, other body artists believe that copyrighting custom work is a positive step for the body art industry because it shows that society recognizes tattoos as an art form.

As the body art community continues to debate whether or not to employ copyrights, some have already put copyrights to use. Artists who create flash, tattoo design sheets, own the copyright to their work at creation. The creator sells licenses to tattoo artists that allow them to use the designs in their tattoos. Buyers of flash may resell their own copies of the flash, but they are not allowed to make copies of the sheets and sell or exchange them. Doing so would be copyright infringement.

An example of a copyright infringement case relating to tattoos recently occurred in Portland, Oregon. Matthew Reed of Tiger Lilly Tattoo and Design Works is using to stop Detroit Pistons player Rasheed Wallace from displaying his tattoo in an ad for Nike basketball shoes. In 1998 Wallace approached Reed because he wanted a tattoo of an Egyptian-themed family with a king, queen, and three children. Reed researched the idea and created a custom design, which he tattooed onto Wallace’s arm. Reed claims that displaying his tattoo in the ad is a violation of the copyright he owns for a pencil drawing of an Egyptian family. Wallace claims that since he approached Reed with the idea for the design, either he owns the intellectual property rights to the design or shares them with Reed. If a court determines that Reed and Wallace share ownership, Reed says he is entitled to part of the money that Wallace was paid for the ad, which ran on television and on the Internet.