{"id":21290,"date":"2014-08-08T13:33:13","date_gmt":"2014-08-08T17:33:13","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/sidebarforplaintiffs.naomifein.net\/?p=21290"},"modified":"2014-08-22T11:53:48","modified_gmt":"2014-08-22T15:53:48","slug":"the-monkey-selfie-matter","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/sidebarforplaintiffs.naomifein.net\/?p=21290","title":{"rendered":"The monkey selfie matter"},"content":{"rendered":"

I’ve been working hard to avoid mentioning this lawsuit \u2212 I think<\/em> it’s a lawsuit \u2212 but Lowering the Bar has weighed in on it, and I go wherever Lowering the Bar takes me so … Fight Continues Over Right to Monkey Selfie – Lowering the Bar<\/a>.<\/p>\n

Fight Continues Over Right to Monkey Selfie<\/strong><\/em><\/h3>\n
\n
\n

As some of you may recall (although it’s been three years, which doesn’t seem possible), in 2011 we discussed an intellectual-property dispute involving pictures taken by a monkey.\u00a0See\u00a0“Legal Questions Raised by Success of Monkey Photographer<\/a> (July 7, 2011);\u00a0“In Defense of Monkey Copyright<\/a>” (July 13, 2011).<\/em><\/p>\n

I’m enjoying the fact that what doesn’t seem possible is that it’s been three years, not that we were discussing an intellectual-property dispute involving a monkey.<\/em><\/p>\n

\"Monkey!\"<\/a><\/em><\/p>\n
Photo credit: David Slater and\/or unidentified primate and\/or nobody<\/em><\/div>\n<\/div>\n

Anyway, as a refresher, the issue arose because the monkey did not own the camera, nor was he authorized to use it (so it wasn’t a “work for hire”). The photographer, David Slater, had set his camera on a tripod and then walked away for a minute, and when he did a monkey hijacked it and took “hundreds” of unauthorized pictures. Several of which were particularly great.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

Cute actual selfie of that monkey \u2192<\/p>\n

Wikimedia has been posting the pictures without crediting David Slater, the camera owner, who is understandably pissed and who is therefore suing Wikimedia (first I knew there was such an entity), which is arguing that this can’t be an intellectual property problem since the monkey (who hasn’t been named as a party, presumably, or even named<\/em>) is not a person with intellectual property rights.<\/p>\n

I think<\/em> that’s a digest of the situation. Yeah. Why not? I’ll go with this. I am, by the way, the actual person who wrote this abstract.<\/p>\n

UPDATE 8\/22\/2014: From Lowering the Bar which is keeping a sharp eye on this story, needless to say: Copyright Office Weighs in on Monkey Pictures – Lowering the Bar<\/a>.<\/p>\n

Whew. We writers can breath a sigh of relief. Except no, because as Kevin Underhill points out (it always takes a lawyer to take one’s breath away), this so-called decision really doesn’t settle the matter.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

I’ve been working hard to avoid mentioning this lawsuit \u2212 I think it’s a lawsuit \u2212 but Lowering the Bar has weighed in on it, and I go wherever Lowering the Bar takes me so … Fight Continues Over Right … Continue reading →<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[337],"tags":[602,603],"class_list":["post-21290","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-legal-news","tag-intellectual-property-law","tag-intellectual-property-lawsuits"],"aioseo_notices":[],"aioseo_head":"\n\t\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\t