Monkeys Cannot Own Copyright

Generali

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2016/01/judge-says-monkey-cannot-own-copyright-to-famous-selfies/

SAN FRANCISCO—A federal judge on Wednesday said that a monkey that swiped a British nature photographer's camera during an Indonesian jungle shoot and snapped selfies cannot own the intellectual property rights to those handful of pictures. US District Judge William Orrick was tasked with hearing a lawsuit brought by the People For The Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA). The Animal rights group was trying to represent the 6-year-old monkey, Naruto, in a case brought against the human photographer, David Slater, and his self-publishing platform, Blurb of San Francisco.



The monkey—via PETA's intervention—was seeking monetary damages for copyright infringement from Slater and the Blurb, the platform Slater used to publish the selfies. The US Copyright Office says Slater cannot own the rights to the handful of images snapped in the Tangkoko reserve on the Indonesian island of Sulawesi in 2011. Works "produced by nature, animals, or plants" cannot be granted copyright protection, the US Copyright Office said in 2014.

mayonnaise

Ted 2 comes to mind.

Malthusian

Even a monkey could have told them that. Well, a monkey couldn't, for the same reason they can't own property - they aren't sentient and don't understand what property is.

The more interesting question is whether the photo taken by the macaque is in the public domain, or under the copyright of the guy (David Slater) who set up the camera and arranged for the macaque to take the photo. Wikipedia among others is using the photo without paying Slater or asking his permission on the grounds that it's in the public domain. If they are wrong they owe him a lot of money.

The lawsuit by PETA was a silly publicity stunt in pursuit of their belief that there is no quality that separates animals from humans.

chris_m

Typical waste of time and money from PETA.

cells

monkeys and other animals can and do own property they just dont have a legal system to enforce it instead they have tooth and nail to try and enforce it which was basically the system we had until not that long ago

mayonnaise

Malthusian wrote: »

....and arranged for the macaque to take the photo.

I wonder how macaque and the 70% Club are doing.

kabayiri

The photographer claimed on the radio tonight that some of these sites using his pictures were actually using a picture of the wrong monkey!

chucknorris

Generali wrote: »

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2016/01/judge-says-monkey-cannot-own-copyright-to-famous-selfies/

What if the monkey in question is a businessman like in this video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ELCvlV6ooos

chucknorris

cells wrote: »

monkeys and other animals can and do own property they just dont have a legal system to enforce it instead they have tooth and nail to try and enforce it which was basically the system we had until not that long ago

I agree, my dog owns 4 rope toys, a nylon chew, 4 tennis balls, a football and 6 kongs, I know this because I gave them all to him.

zagubov

Haven't there been wills in various countries where the deceased had left property/wealth to their pets?

Mistermeaner

chucknorris wrote: »

I agree, my dog owns 4 rope toys, a nylon chew, 4 tennis balls, a football and 6 kongs, I know this because I gave them all to him.

And what did you take in consideration to make this contract binding?