UKC

Copyright is not Monkey Business

New Topic
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
 winhill 22 Aug 2014
If a monkey takes a selfie, who owns the image - the monkey or the man with the camera? Now we have an answer to surely the most important legal question of modern times: it's neither.

The US copyright office has ruled that any work created by an animal- monkey or otherwise- as well as plants, nature, divine or supernatural beings does not belong to them or anyone else.

If the work is not created by a human being, it can not be copyrighted.

The copyright office specifically referenced the “monkey selfie” case, in which a British photographer claimed ownership of the image taken by a black macaque when it swiped his camera after it was used in a Wikipedia entry.

http://www.cityam.com/1408699840/monkey-selfie-macaque-does-not-own-image-n...
 Seocan 22 Aug 2014
In reply to winhill:

Who the F are they to decide on what a British man (or a monkey ) owns or does not own?
 andrewmc 22 Aug 2014
In reply to Seocan:

I would the US copyright office is the relevant body to decide on cases relating to copyright in the US?
OP winhill 22 Aug 2014
In reply to Seocan:

> Who the F are they to decide on what a British man (or a monkey ) owns or does not own?

It seems some American complained about the Wiki removal.

But I wonder what the view is on remote triggers? I could imagine a lawyer putting together a decent case that a remote trigger, IR, Motion, pressure pad, was just an extension of the shutter button and therefore no copyright exists on those either.
 Ava Adore 22 Aug 2014
In reply to winhill:

I bet the monkey is gutted

 Seocan 23 Aug 2014
In reply to winhill:

thar was the photogrhers case, he set up the whole situation. It was no accidental occurence.
 Chris Murray 23 Aug 2014
In reply to Seocan:

> thar was the photogrhers case, he set up the whole situation. It was no accidental occurence.

...do I detect a hint of a West Country accent?
 The Pylon King 23 Aug 2014
In reply to winhill:

The US copyright office are kunts.
 Indy 24 Aug 2014
In reply to winhill:

Wouldn't have thought so because a human has to set it up to act that way otherwise if I triggered your motion sensor I'd be the copyright holder of the image taken on your camera.

For what its worth I think the US copyright decision is the correct one.
 timjones 24 Aug 2014
In reply to Seocan:

> thar was the photogrhers case, he set up the whole situation. It was no accidental occurence.

So his claims that the monkey took the pictures after taking his camera where false?

It seems that a told a pack of fibs to sell the pictures and ultimately got his just desserts when people believed his bu//$hit
 krikoman 24 Aug 2014
In reply to Ava Adore:

> I bet the monkey is gutted

Earned peanuts apparently!!

New Topic
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Loading Notifications...