Luminous Landscape Forum
The Art of Photography => The Coffee Corner => Topic started by: tom b on August 05, 2017, 05:57:59 pm
-
Monkey selfie photographer says he's broke: 'I'm thinking of dog walking'
David Slater has been fighting for years over who has the copyright to photos taken by monkeys using his camera, and says he’s struggling as a result.
Monkey sues photographer (https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/jul/12/monkey-selfie-macaque-copyright-court-david-slater)
Cheers,
-
Honestly, can a monkey hold copyright of an image. Surely there should be some response. Has LuLa become so indifferent to professional photographers needs?
Worried,
-
Sorry, Tom - it's just that this story has been ongoing for so long and even the most recent struggle and situation are a couple of weeks old. It's absurd. I really am troubled by Wikipedia being one of the lead protagonists here - they take a view of copyright that it basically shouldn't exist because they want to use anything they want and that troubles me because it's such a good project but on this issue Jimmy Wales is miles off target.
Anywhere other than the US I would have said no way a monkey can hold copyright. It has no legal standing to do so. The owner of the monkey, maybe, if it's in a zoo or something. The whole situation is absurd.
-
It is ridiculous. If this monkey has the copyright, then every photo where an animal has tripped an infra red beam, is owned by that animal. I would suggest paying into their bank accounts. Good luck with that.
-
Has anyone interviewed the monkey to get its opinion? (Sorry, couldn't stop myself.)
-
There are two separate legal issues here.
One is the case which denied the camera owner's claim to copyright, and put the image in the public domain. That is the one involving TechDirt and then Wikipedia.
The other far more absurd case is the one taken by lawyers employed by PETA on the farcical claim that they represent the monkey which pressed the shutter release on the camera, claiming copyright for the monkey. I am mystified as to why the courts have not dismissed that case on the basis that the lawyers have no standing, given that they have no evidence that the monkey wants this case to be pursued by them (or anyone else). That case also wants the owners of web-sites that allow self-publishing to be financially responsible for copyright violations, which could potentially shut down sites like LuLa if people start suing over copyright claims to images posted in forums or on blogs. (Take-down orders might be appropriate in that case, but nothing more.)
-
Has anyone interviewed the monkey to get its opinion? (Sorry, couldn't stop myself.)
Just wait till the said monkey becomes Time's Person of the Year ;)
-
Just wait till the said monkey becomes Time's Person of the Year ;)
or runs for president
-
or runs for president
Now you are just monkeying around 😀
-
The other far more absurd case is the one taken by lawyers employed by PETA on the farcical claim that they represent the monkey which pressed the shutter release on the camera, claiming copyright for the monkey. I am mystified as to why the courts have not dismissed that case on the basis that the lawyers have no standing, given that they have no evidence that the monkey wants this case to be pursued by them (or anyone else).
A court (why the plural?) has done just that, albeit not in quite those terms, as I understand it; the case has been dismissed but an appeal is proceeding.
Jeremy
-
A court (why the plural?) has done just that, albeit not in quite those terms, as I understand it; the case has been dismissed but an appeal is proceeding.
I'm glad to hear that the case has been rejected again; last I heard, a settlement was being planned.
I said "courts" because the case has gone through appeals and thus several courts, dragging on for about two years, and I am puzzled why multiple judges did not dismiss it more quickly.
https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2017/08/monkey-selfie-animal-rights-brouhaha-devolves-into-a-settlement/
-
I'm glad to hear that the case has been rejected again; last I heard, a settlement was being planned.
I said "courts" because the case has gone through appeals and thus several courts, dragging on for about two years, and I am puzzled why multiple judges did not dismiss it more quickly.
https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2017/08/monkey-selfie-animal-rights-brouhaha-devolves-into-a-settlement/
Interesting; and thanks for the link. I now know that what we call a respondent, Americans call an appellee. It's a sad day when you learn nothing new.
Jeremy
-
Just wait till the said monkey becomes Time's Person of the Year ;)
Hey, no primate bashing. This is typical of you conservative, xenophobes! You should be severely punished by the full force of the law for being so intolerant of the "right way to think." What's the matter with you? Don't you know that we're merely another primate? To suggest that a fellow primate shouldn't be Time's Person of the Year (or president for that matter - we got really close on this last election) only shows the depths of your shallow thinking. An outrage, I say! The only legitimate "non-persons" allowed in this paradigm are the unborn.
Rand
-
The case has been settled.
http://www.canberratimes.com.au/world/lawsuit-settles-monkey-narutos-selfie-rights-20170912-gyfntx.html
Cheers,