Source Petty as fuck, imo. I think a tattoo artists kinda loses the claims of design when its procedurally inscribed on another person's body. Not to mention that it makes little sense considering Orton has the tattoos, paid for the tattoos and signed a licensing agreement with WWE and 2K. Unless it's a third-party logo, the idea that a tattoo artist owns another person's tattoos because they made them is kinda like implying that the people that produce the fabric for the wrestler's gears can sue because they produced the gear. Hardly ethical, and outlandish claims. Thoughts?