• Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter
Photo

photographer loses lawsuit ...to a monkey


  • Please log in to reply
19 replies to this topic

#1 toni-a

toni-a

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,169 posts
  • LocationLebanon

Posted 15 July 2017 - 08:05 AM

hilarious 

 

https://petapixel.co...lawsuit-monkey/



#2 Rainer

Rainer

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 441 posts
  • LocationSouth Germany

Posted 15 July 2017 - 08:22 AM

Well, technically said, the Photographer has not lost a lawsuit to a monkey

... so the caption is a bit misleading ...

 

But the lesson learned from this is ...

as a photographer, you cannot and must not sell (or try to sell, or claim ownership of)

photographs you did not personally take yourself.

 

The case is ridiculous ... but it started with a fault of the photographer ...

he should have let that photo go when it was already on the internet (rather

than claiming his copyright (that never existed)) ... or ... he should have

never published the photographs.

 

So ... acutally this case is not so hilarious at all.

 

Rainer



#3 dave's clichés

dave's clichés

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,621 posts

Posted 15 July 2017 - 11:49 AM

   It certainly shows that you shouldn't throw all your money into a long term court case.......



#4 photonius

photonius

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 295 posts

Posted 15 July 2017 - 11:50 AM

This opens a Pandora's box. What about automatic systems? E.g., photo traps? E.g., the wild life photographer who won a price for his snow leopard (?) shots in the Himalayas. The leopard triggered it itself.


  • stoppingdown and obican like this

#5 JoJu

JoJu

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2,553 posts
  • LocationSwitzerland

Posted 15 July 2017 - 12:29 PM

Naaah. If the photog would have set a movie camera and then just used the right picture, there's still entirely his effort. The monkey was pointing the photog's camera at his face - so the court only stated, the photog's rights are not bound at his camera but on the photog. At the end a good thing.

 

If I ever used Annie Leibovitz' camera and take a picture of her, it remains my work and not Leibovitz' camera's.



#6 popo

popo

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,353 posts
  • LocationUK

Posted 16 July 2017 - 09:47 AM

I think this case only serves to show the flaws in the US copyright and legal system. There should be a point of authority for a shoot. If the monkey could not be assigned copyright, it should fall to the nearest appropriate involved person who can. It shouldn't go straight into public domain.

 

I wonder how this might have ended if it was challenged in a country other than the US?


  • stoppingdown likes this

dA Canon 7D2, 7D, 5D2, 600D, 450D, 300D IR modified, 1D, EF-S 10-18, 15-85, EF 35/2, 85/1.8, 135/2, 70-300L, 100-400L, MP-E65, Zeiss 2/50, Sigma 150 macro, 120-300/2.8, Samyang 8mm fisheye, Olympus E-P1, Panasonic 20/1.7, Sony HX9V, Fuji X100.


#7 admin

admin

    Administrator

  • Administrators
  • 26 posts

Posted 16 July 2017 - 11:37 PM

First world problems ...
  • popo likes this

#8 stoppingdown

stoppingdown

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 530 posts
  • LocationGenoa / Milan, Italy

Posted 22 July 2017 - 12:33 PM

I second photonius' and popo's remarks.

 

In any case, the next photographer in a similar case - without other human witnesses - will just tell a different story, such as "the monkey tried to grab the camera from my hands, but I still managed to take a few shots".


stoppingdown.net

 

Sony a6300, Sony a6000, Sony NEX-6, Sony E 10-18mm F4 OSS, Sony Zeiss Vario-Tessar T* E 16-70mm F4 ZA OSS, Sony FE 70-200mm F4 G OSS, Sigma 150-600mm ƒ/5-6.3 DG OS HSM Contemporary, Samyang 12mm ƒ/2, Sigma 30mm F2.8 DN | A, Meyer Gorlitz Trioplan 100mm ƒ/2.8, Samyang 8mm ƒ/3.5 fish-eye II | Zenit Helios 44-2 58mm ƒ/2 
Plus some legacy Nikkor lenses.

#9 GoldRingNikkor

GoldRingNikkor

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 37 posts

Posted 22 July 2017 - 03:44 PM

Comments here are a bit confusing. The guy was sued by PETA, and he won several times, but they would keep suing him. So it's neither a problem of him looking for trouble, nor is it a problem with US law, but it's a problem with a stubborn organization that will make this go to the supreme court. No?


  • stoppingdown likes this

#10 Rainer

Rainer

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 441 posts
  • LocationSouth Germany

Posted 22 July 2017 - 11:42 PM

No?

No! Sorry, you do not seem to get the facts straight!



#11 GoldRingNikkor

GoldRingNikkor

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 37 posts

Posted 23 July 2017 - 05:32 AM

No! Sorry, you do not seem to get the facts straight!

 

"PETA then filed a lawsuit against Slater on the monkey’s behalf to have the copyright assigned to the monkey. The US Copyright Office stated in 2014 that it can’t assign copyright to animals, and a judge ruled in 2016 that the monkey can’t own copyright to the famous selfie. Since then, the case has gotten bumped up to a US federal appeals court..."

 

?



#12 toni-a

toni-a

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,169 posts
  • LocationLebanon

Posted 23 July 2017 - 10:33 AM

Sometimes I can't understand the Americans, they go so far claiming selfies copyright to a monkey, then they use them in animal testing and never hesitate polluting and destroying their environment!!!

#13 JoJu

JoJu

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2,553 posts
  • LocationSwitzerland

Posted 23 July 2017 - 11:57 AM

Even in North-America different people exist.



#14 toni-a

toni-a

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,169 posts
  • LocationLebanon

Posted 23 July 2017 - 12:34 PM

Well unless lawyers are volunteers or no legal expenses what PETA did is pointless, the monkey doesn't care for the copyright, and the money could be spent more efficiently in other ways that could benefit animals more. Contributors won't be happy seeing their money spent this way.

#15 Rainer

Rainer

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 441 posts
  • LocationSouth Germany

Posted 23 July 2017 - 03:06 PM

?

 

How about you start the story from its beginning?

 

There was not possibly a sentence like ...

 

"After the original monkey selfie photos went viral on the Web, a takedown request was sent on Slater’s behalf to a publication that shared the images."

 

... somewhere. And you are aware what "takedown requests" are and

what it means that they were being sent on "Slater's behalf" ?

 

So, eventually you realise, there has been action before the guy was being sued by Peta?

 

But eventually, you live in a universe with a slightly different kind of truth?

(A universe with a blond wig eventually?)



#16 stoppingdown

stoppingdown

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 530 posts
  • LocationGenoa / Milan, Italy

Posted 23 July 2017 - 05:11 PM

Pollution happens everywhere, and AFAIK in India and China mainly. BTW, I don't want to start an OT, but I'd like to point out that CO2 is not a pollutant. Things are quite complex. It's better to stay on the original topic.


stoppingdown.net

 

Sony a6300, Sony a6000, Sony NEX-6, Sony E 10-18mm F4 OSS, Sony Zeiss Vario-Tessar T* E 16-70mm F4 ZA OSS, Sony FE 70-200mm F4 G OSS, Sigma 150-600mm ƒ/5-6.3 DG OS HSM Contemporary, Samyang 12mm ƒ/2, Sigma 30mm F2.8 DN | A, Meyer Gorlitz Trioplan 100mm ƒ/2.8, Samyang 8mm ƒ/3.5 fish-eye II | Zenit Helios 44-2 58mm ƒ/2 
Plus some legacy Nikkor lenses.

#17 toni-a

toni-a

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,169 posts
  • LocationLebanon

Posted 06 August 2017 - 04:16 PM

Seems they got into a settlement

 

https://arstechnica....o-a-settlement/



#18 photonius

photonius

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 295 posts

Posted 06 August 2017 - 06:40 PM

Seems they got into a settlement

 

https://arstechnica....o-a-settlement/

 

The winner being, more often than not, the lawyers....  



#19 toni-a

toni-a

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,169 posts
  • LocationLebanon

Posted 06 August 2017 - 07:35 PM

The winner being, more often than not, the lawyers....


You know how much healthcare professionals love lawyers... You are targeting a very sensitive area...
Here's w lawyer joke:
A person suspect of stealing a diamond necklace was in court he was declared innocent.
After release his friend asked him, as I know you should be really glad to have such a good lawyer.
Good lawyer? the ex suspect said... I didn't have enough money to pay him so he took the necklace.
  • stoppingdown likes this

#20 GoldRingNikkor

GoldRingNikkor

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 37 posts

Posted 06 August 2017 - 08:38 PM

But eventually, you live in a universe with a slightly different kind of truth?

(A universe with a blond wig eventually?)

 

I don't know why you are being so confrontational and offensive.

 

Also, you may want to look up the English meaning of "eventually". It may not be what you think it is...






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users



© by photozone.de