Judge Rules Monkey That Took Selfie Cannot Own the Copyright

[engine]

Remember that image that did the rounds showing a Macaque monkey staring into a camera lens whilst it pressed the shutter? It was a charming image. There was the big question about who owns the copyright. It's been to court in the U.S. and the Judge has ruled that the monkey cannot own the copyright for its selfie.

A US court has ruled that a macaque monkey who took pictures of himself cannot own the copyright to the photographs.Judge Rules Monkey That Took Selfie Cannot Own the Copyright [telegraph.co.uk]

U.S. District Judge William Orrick, presiding at a federal court in San Francisco, ruled that "while Congress and the president can extend the protection of law to animals as well as humans, there is no indication that they did so in the Copyright Act."

“I just don’t see that it could go as broadly as beyond humans,” he added.

[londrum]

poor monkey. next time he takes a picture for somebody he should demand payment up front.

[fathom]

Wouldn't that mean the owner of the camera is the Copyright Holder... surely the monkey didn't buy the camera.

While it might hav been a gift

[Leosghost]

Wouldn't that mean the owner of the camera is the Copyright Holder... surely the monkey didn't buy the camera.

While it might hav been a gift

Were that to be the case..
One might even say the monkey was "gifted"..
So..If it ( or any other "gifted" entity ) were to take up SEO..
Everyone would have to worry ..
Or not..
Unless one was unfortunate enough to be one of it's ( or any other "gifted" entity's ) clients..

Had the judge ruled otherwise..all nature photographers using triggered or time lapse photography or video would have been betwixt a rock and a hard place..having to get model releases from a hundred thousand soldier ants, or a field of corn, or a shoal of sardines would really have cramped the style of Jacques Cousteau and David Attenborough amongst many others..
Not to mention Armand and Mikaela Denis and a huge amount of Disney's and the BBC's output..

[toidi]

Wheeeeeewwwww, sanity still survives, although i think it is on life support.

[fathom]

Unfortunately no one cared about the monkey, everyone wanted the revenue stream that the monkey (sort of) represented.

[tangor]

I know a few black sites that are using monkeys to produce content (links to copyrighted stuff). We'll see if the judges can rule on that since we now have precedent that monkey's can't be "copyright" holders.

(You have trained your Macaque monkey to hit the ENTER KEY, right?)

[fathom]

A totally worthless post but sprayed the couple, with coffee, at the next table reading that tidbit!

[tangor]

I'll pass that on to Cheeta, (I do have a monkey on my back) who is working adsense at the moment for a few sites. Keeps hitting ENTER instead of the MAKEMONEY key. Have to do a little more training. :)

All kidding aside, this ruling screws someone and that is the photographer. He might not have clicked the shutter, but if not for him and his working tools being in place there never would have been an image. Secondary, also not addressed, is who took that image and posted it in the first place? (I confess I have not done due diligence for all the facts)

Somebody got screwed, else there never would have been a court case or need of one, or any jokes about same.