Monkey owns Selfie Copyright!

[Jeff Conrad]

By US law, a copyright infringement case will not be heard in Federal court unless the item is officially copyrighted first.

Doesn’t Slater’s UK copyright count? His infringement claim and PETA’s claim (whatever it may be) are of course separate pieces of monkey business.

How can the monkey do that? PETA or a proxy would have to do it, and it seems unlikely the US Copyright office will allow it.

Especially since they say they won’t ... But perhaps PETA are trying to force them. I haven’t been sufficiently interested to cough up money to PACER to read the filings, so I don’t really know what PETA are claiming. Until shown otherwise, though, I’ll stand by my previous assessment.

[Nodda Duma]

What really sucks is that the photographer has to pay for a lawyer. That is a lot of money to shell out. In that regard, he's already lost.

[analoguey]

Copyrights to the monkey, licensed to the photographer exclusively and pay them both - with the money for monkey used to provide better enclosure/safety and/or environment?
(or is that too Easy to do?)

[Old-N-Feeble]

If a big grasshopper bumps my shutter and takes a photo do I have to find that grasshopper to get a release? How will he sign it? More importantly... how will I find that specific grasshopper?

[Drew Wiley]

Monkeys taking money? Isn't the practice of politics banned from this forum?

[DannL]

". . . they're claiming the monkey owns the copyright."

If this is true . . . . then Wikimedia is admitting they are infringing in on the monkey's copyright. How can this monkey pursue a living selling images, if Wikimedia is giving them away. Who is representing the monkey here?

This sounds like an April Fools joke to me. Since when are primates allowed the benefits afforded by Copyright? What next, chickens and fish? I must call foul. If the photographer allowed the monkey to take the picture, he has non-verbally contracted with the monkey, which is obviously incapable of understanding such concepts in law. All rights must belong to the photographer. That's my final ruling.

[Liquid Artist]

My girlfriends brother was kidnapped by monkeys when he was a baby. Now I wonder if they are legally my family.

Primates are notorious for flinging sh... stuff. And so are lawyers.

I have a photo of an old manure spreader I named The Politician for a reason

[Jeff Conrad]

What really sucks is that the photographer has to pay for a lawyer. That is a lot of money to shell out. In that regard, he's already lost.

Slate and The Register address this pretty well. The complaint seems pretty ridiculous. I hope the court has the wisdom to throw this out on its ear, find it completely frivolous, and stick it to PETA for court costs, attorneys’ fees, and damages, though I have little hope this will happen.

As usual, Slater’s publisher, Blurb, Inc., have an indemnity clause, so he appears to be on the hook for legal costs. Yet another reason to treat all “indemnify and hold harmless” provisions seriously (photo contests and similar come to mind).