Federal court to rule if a monkey owns the copyright for its selfie photos
Federal court to rule if a monkey owns the copyright for
its selfie photos
Updated on July 12, 2017 at 10:13 PM Posted on July 12,
2017 at 7:42 PM
This 2011 photo provided by People for the Ethical
Treatment of Animals shows a selfie taken by a macaque monkey on the Indonesian
island of Sulawesi with a camera that was positioned by British nature
photographer David Slater. The photo is part of a court exhibit in a lawsuit
filed by PETA. (David Slater/Court exhibit via AP)
By Associated Press
SAN FRANCISCO -- A curious monkey with a toothy grin and
a knack for pressing a camera button was back in the spotlight Wednesday as a
federal appeals court heard arguments on whether an animal can hold a copyright
to selfie photos.
A 45-minute hearing before a three-judge panel of the 9th
U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco attracted crowds of law students
and curious citizens who often burst into laughter. The federal judges also
chuckled at times at the novelty of the case, which involves a monkey in
another country that is unaware of the fuss.
Andrew Dhuey, attorney for British nature photographer
David Slater, said "monkey see, monkey sue" is not good law under any
federal act.
Naruto is a free-living crested macaque who snapped
perfectly framed selfies in 2011 that would make even the Kardashians proud.
People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals sued Slater
and the San Francisco-based self-publishing company Blurb, which published a
book called "Wildlife Personalities" that includes the monkey
selfies, for copyright infringement. It sought a court order in 2015 allowing
it to administer all proceeds from the photos taken in a wildlife reserve in
Sulawesi, Indonesia to benefit the monkey.
Slater says the British copyright for the photos obtained
by his company, Wildlife Personalities Ltd., should be honored.
PETA attorney David Schwarz argued that Naruto was
accustomed to cameras and took the selfies when he saw himself in the
reflection of the lens.
A federal judge ruled against PETA and the monkey last
year, saying he lacked the right to sue because there was no indication that
Congress intended to extend copyright protection to animals.
Throughout Wednesday's hearing, Schwarz pushed back,
arguing that the case came down to one simple fact: photographs can be
copyrighted and Naruto is the author.
"We have to look at the word 'authorship' in the
broadest sense," he said.
The judges grilled him on why PETA has status to
represent Naruto and said that "having genuine care for the animal"
isn't enough to establish "next friend" relationship, which is
required to represent the monkey in court.
The judges did not issue a ruling Wednesday.
Angela Dunning, an attorney for Blurb, wondered at the
possibilities if they do not prevail.
"Where does it end? If a monkey can sue for
copyright infringement, what else can a monkey do?" she said after the
hearing.
PETA's general counsel Jeff Kerr said after the hearing
that the group plans to use money from the photos to protect monkey habitats
and help people study the monkeys.
"PETA is clearly representing Naruto's best
interests," he said.
Dhuey said the legal antics were more of a publicity
stunt by PETA than a lawsuit. He quipped after the hearing that Naruto made a
tactical mistake by not appearing in court.
"It's like he doesn't even care," he said
before walking away from cameras.
Comments
Post a Comment