Still Waters Posted August 6, 2014 #1 Share Posted August 6, 2014 Wikimedia, the organisation behind Wikipedia, has refused a photographer's repeated requests to remove one of his images which is used online without his permission, claiming that because a monkey pressed the shutter button it owns the copyright. http://www.telegraph...ey-owns-it.html 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
questionmark Posted August 6, 2014 #2 Share Posted August 6, 2014 Technically the owner of the monkey owns the copyright because legally, in almost all countries, the monkey is a thing. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
:PsYKoTiC:BeHAvIoR: Posted August 6, 2014 #3 Share Posted August 6, 2014 This situation reminds me of another topic on this board: http://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=265693 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
seeder Posted August 6, 2014 #4 Share Posted August 6, 2014 Would a court of law acknowledge that an animal can own copyright? Dont think so Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
questionmark Posted August 6, 2014 #5 Share Posted August 6, 2014 Would a court of law acknowledge that an animal can own copyright? Dont think so No, but the owner of the animal. See above. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EllJay Posted August 6, 2014 #6 Share Posted August 6, 2014 (edited) I just love the facial expression and smile on those two pictures. Edited August 6, 2014 by EllJay 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SHaYap Posted August 6, 2014 #7 Share Posted August 6, 2014 I'd say that that is but monkey business for you ~ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ealdwita Posted August 6, 2014 #8 Share Posted August 6, 2014 That'll be a primate facie case then....Boom boom! 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keel M. Posted August 6, 2014 #9 Share Posted August 6, 2014 (edited) I just love the facial expression and smile on those two pictures. I think it's amazing that the animal was intelligent enough to smile for the second photo. Animals are amazing sometimes. But in this case I do believe Wikimedia is being a bit stupid. Edited August 6, 2014 by Child of Bast 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr.United_Nations Posted August 6, 2014 #10 Share Posted August 6, 2014 the photographer owns the camera, and so forth Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
questionmark Posted August 6, 2014 #11 Share Posted August 6, 2014 the photographer owns the camera, and so forth Owning the camera, pencil or brush does not make you a copyright holder unless there is a contract with the artist specifying that. (At least not i.a. with current laws) I would like to see that.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Insaniac Posted August 7, 2014 #12 Share Posted August 7, 2014 (edited) Mistook them for CGI images at first... Edited August 7, 2014 by Insaniac Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now