Menu Sidebar
Menu

Kirkville

TECHMUSICBOOKSARTSETC.

My Latest Books

My Podcast

   

4 Comments

  1. I am not sure what you are implying with the “No comment”, but while I assume Wikipedia is more joking when they say that the monkey owns the copyright. The truth is that most likely, no court will find the “photographer” to have a copyright in the picture. First of all, it needs to be appreciated that there is no single copyright. Rather, copyright – like any intellectual property right – is limited in its territoriality. Thus, there is a British copyright, an American copyright, a German copyright, etc., all with slightly differing scopes. The claimant would need to demonstrate that he owns the copyright for each territory for which he wants the alleged infringement of copyright to stop. Furthermore, assuming Wikimedia is not an English company, English courts would really only have jurisdiction as far as the infringement of British copyright is asserted. The Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, just like for instance the German copyright act – seems to be based on the assumption that for there to be copyright, there needs to be an author of the work, in other words, somebody must have been in control of all the creative aspects which render the work a copyrighted work in the first place. Since this was the monkey, not the photographer, the photographer cannot be said to be the author of the work. To paraphrase the photographer “What he doesn’t realise is that it needs a court to decide that he actually has a valid claim and he needs to demonstrate that all requirements of the claim are met”. From what he has said so far, his only legitimate argument that he “did all the setting up” does not really seem valid, because any monkey with a camera could have made that shot. I don’t see how any creativity on the part of the photographer was involved in the creation of the photography.

    Reply

  2. Hey now, this is Europe… you cannot sue the monkey! have a Jura whisky, play some Dizzy Gillespie and chill-out :)

    Reply

  3. Have any of these copyright acts been explained to the monkey?

    Reply

Leave a Reply