Cardi B Beats Lawsuit Over Album Art Tattoo

By Sidra LackeyRapper

Cardi B recently won a lawsuit filed against her by Kevin Brophy, a man who had his back tattoo used without his permission, on the cover of Cardi B’s 2016 album: Gangsta Bitch Music Vol. 1. Brophy filed his lawsuit 5 years ago against Cardi B but it only took 4 days in court for Cardi B to be cleared of Brophy’s allegations.

Brophy sought millions in damages against Cardi B as he claimed she, “misused his likeness in order to launch her career in a misleading, offensive, humiliating and provocatively sexual way” on the cover of her album Gangsta Bitch Music Vol. 1. On Cardi B’s debut mixtape cover she is showcased getting a sexual act done by a man whose back, and back tattoo (a tiger fighting a snake) are blatant. Brophy’s lawyer Barry Cappello argued, “This wasn’t hers to take,” during his opening statement, according to Courthouse News. “It’s the personal property, the personal identity, of a private citizen.” Cardi B on the other hand argued the image was, “transformative fair use.” 

“Transformative use is a relatively new addition to fair use law, having been first raised in a Supreme Court decision in 1994. (Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music, 510 U.S. 569 (1994.) A new work based on an old one work is transformative if it uses the source work in completely new or unexpected ways,” The University of Minnesota’s online library explains.

Artnet News revealed that Timm Gooden, the graphic designer behind Cardi B’s Gangsta Bitch Vol. 1 album cover art, submitted his first draft and after he was asked to find a more “suitable tattoo” to replace the model’s existing back tattoo (a cartoon animal with his finger in his mouth). When Gooden googled “back tattoos” he found Brophy’s tattoo. 

Cardi B argued also that, “only a small portion of the tattoo was used” without her knowledge. Her lawyer, Peter Anderson, pointed out that the graphic designer only took a portion of the image of the tiger, “and put it on a toned, muscular, Black gentleman—the model, who has a full head of black hair. Brophy is a White man with a shaven head,” Courthouse News reported.

When Brophy took the stand in court, the father and husband stated, “I would never ever sign off on an image like this, being a father of two. No one ever asked for my consent. This was just an image that came into my life. This was my Michelangelo. It just felt devalued. It felt like my Michelangelo was stolen off the wall.” His tattoo was done by prominent tattoo artist Tim Hendricks. Brophy informed the court of all the time, money and effort put into the distinct tattoo during one-hour sessions, over the course of a year and a half. 

Bloomberg Law said on the case, “the case hinged not on copying an expressive work but on commercial appropriation of Brophy’s likeness. Brophy argued that his work for a surfing and lifestyle company requires him to be shirtless regularly, and that his unique tattoo of a tiger fighting a snake “has become a unique feature and likeness by which both his friends and the business and surfing community know him.”

But the jury disagreed with Brophy that there was a likeness between his tattoo and the model’s tattoo art on Cardi B’s album cover. Cardi B won in the end, even though she said, “I wasn’t sure if I was going to lose or not,” according to AP, after leaving the courthouse. Both sides shook hands after the verdict and Kevin Brophy said he respects Cardi B, “as an artist.”
Tattoo collectors, would you have done what Kevin Brophy did if it was your tattoo? Tattoo artists, do you agree with the verdict that the tattoo image was transformative fair use?