The Cellar - July 23, 2011: Monkey takes its own pic (and who gets the copyright?)

The Cellar (http://cellar.org/index.php)

- Image of the Day (http://cellar.org/forumdisplay.php?f=10)

- - July 23, 2011: Monkey takes its own pic (and who gets the copyright?) (http://cellar.org/showthread.php?t=25544)

July 23, 2011: Monkey takes its own pic (and who gets the copyright?)

http://cellar.org/2011/monkself.jpg

Meet the crested black macaque in Indonesia, who stole the camera of photographer David Slater and took these shots himself.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/news...p-himself.html

Quote:

The primate went to investigate the equipment before becoming fascinated with his own reflection in the lens.

And it wasn't long before the crested black macaque hijacked the camera and started snapping away sending award-winning photographer David Slater bananas.

David, 46, said: "One of them must have accidentally knocked the camera and set it off because the sound caused a bit of a frenzy.

"The sound got his attention and he kept pressing it. At first it scared the rest of them away but they soon came back - it was amazing to watch.

"He must have taken hundreds of pictures by the time I got my camera back, but not very many were in focus. He obviously hadn't worked that out yet.

Ah but Mr. Slater... your credit is listed on the photo at the Telegraph, even though you admit the shot is not yours. So I feel fine "stealing" this shot for IotD.

And in fact, the photo credit is disputed at TechDirt:

Quote:

As we noted, it seems pretty clear that under copyright law in the US and the UK, the photograph is in the public domain. They were not created by a human. The creative inputs into the image were not made by a human. There is no copyright on those images. And yet, Slater apparently licensed them to Caters News Agency, who sent us a takedown request. We stand by our assertion that the images are in the public domain, and even if they're not, our use is covered by fair use rules within copyright law.

Well let them come after us. We bite.

heh.

I heard the complaint wasn't that slater had the copyright and was saying to the other publishers of the photos, but that those other publishers didn't have the copyright so they shouldn't be publishing the photos.

You're right, slater doesn't have the copyright either. From what I've learned, the *photographer* has the copyright, not the owner of the camera.

by the way.. that second pic looks just tooo perfect. I think it's been manipulated, cropped, straightened, etc. It doesn't make it a bad or wrong photo, but it is a bit misleading in the context of the monkey taking the picture. Overall, they're fascinating pictures. Thanks UT!

My understanding has always been, from a historical UK point of view at least, that when the photographer cannot claim the copyright it becomes the property of the owner of the film - but I doubt Mr Slater used film...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rhianne (Post 745987)

I remember similar cases where the decision of ownership came down to who had the most skin in the game as they say. Essentially film or not, whoever funded the shoot, supplied camera, crew, technical back-up and otherwise bankrolled it, is the holder of the copyright.

Right hand picture:
"And that, ladies and gentlemen, concludes my presentation of proof that Iraq possesses weapons of mass destruction. Any questions?"

Quote:

Originally Posted by footfootfoot (Post 746085)

Why am I not surprised that the law is on the side of the man with the money and not the photogenic primate? Next thing you know they are going to bring the Macaque up on charges of theft.

The real question is, did he have him sign a waiver?

Won't somebody think of the monkeys? :(

Quote:

Originally Posted by ToastyOhs (Post 746476)

That's the golden rule in action. Whoever has the gold, makes the rules. I think they are also invoking Eminent Domain and taking the macaque's cage and building a small theme park in its place.