Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Ars Technica)   Monkey loses right to own purple dishwasher   ( arstechnica.com) divider line
    More: Followup, Naruto, Copyright, intellectual property, intellectual property rights, David Slater, Law, Property, Trademark  
•       •       •

4819 clicks; posted to Main » on 12 Sep 2017 at 9:08 PM (13 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



37 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2017-09-12 08:38:44 PM  
If a tree can own itself, why shouldn't a monkey own a selfie?

/actually I don't think a human would own exclusive rights to photos taken with someone else's gear.
 
2017-09-12 09:13:42 PM  
I was talking to my refrigerator, who happens to be a layer,  and he told me if a monkey isn't capable of paying the tax on an item the monkey cannot have ownership.
 
2017-09-12 09:20:08 PM  
I wonder what John Cleese thinks of this.
 
2017-09-12 09:27:09 PM  
I was expecting a purple Barbie doll.

I'll see myself out
 
2017-09-12 09:35:04 PM  
King Enma is inconsolable.

i.ytimg.comView Full Size
 
2017-09-12 09:39:02 PM  
I have never seen a purple dishwasher. I thought it was the monkeys that were supposed to be purple.

Have you ever seen one of thos Turquoise refrigerators from the Sixties and Seventies? Boy, were those crap. I read a book that said having one of those were a sign your apartment is a dump. I did. It was.

I remember Harvast Gold and Olive Green and those other shiatty colours. If you ever see such shiatty colours on women's clothing, it means the economy is in a recession. Trust me. I have an eye for such things.

I have no idea what the psychology or sociology of this phenomenon means. But I recognize it when I see it. You can only buy colourful and pastel coloured men's socks when the economy is going gangbusters. The Preppy Look is expensive. The kiddies can't buy when the economy is in the toilet.
 
2017-09-12 09:40:03 PM  
Harvest gold. If harvests were really that colour, people would starve to death.
 
2017-09-12 09:40:50 PM  

CoysOdie: I wonder what John Cleese thinks of this.


According to the article, Cleese thinks PITA and their associated nuts and fruits are the smart ones.
 
2017-09-12 09:43:10 PM  
I would think one of the prerequisites of owing property or other civil entitlements would logically be the ability to make decisions regarding their use and disposal in a manner that demonstrates consciousness of the rights and responsibilities of ownership.

Or, to put it another way, the monkey doesn't give two farks about whether it has protections under copyright law, so why should WE?

"ANIMALS ARE PEOPLE TOO" is a cute PR slogan, but it's NOT an actual legal principle.
 
2017-09-12 09:45:46 PM  
 
2017-09-12 09:47:03 PM  

anustart: I would think one of the prerequisites of owing property or other civil entitlements would logically be the ability to make decisions regarding their use and disposal in a manner that demonstrates consciousness of the rights and responsibilities of ownership.

Or, to put it another way, the monkey doesn't give two farks about whether it has protections under copyright law, so why should WE?

"ANIMALS ARE PEOPLE TOO" is a cute PR slogan, but it's NOT an actual legal principle.


It's more like PEOPLE ARE ANIMALS TOO
 
2017-09-12 09:47:05 PM  

uber humper: Farking PETA bankrupted the poor guy:

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/jul/12/monkey-selfie-maca​que-copyright-court-david-slater

#PETAsucks


I hope he gets to eat the monkey.
 
2017-09-12 09:48:10 PM  
People are farking morons morans

/ftfm
 
2017-09-12 09:49:22 PM  

ThatGuyFromTheInternet: uber humper: Farking PETA bankrupted the poor guy:

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/jul/12/monkey-selfie-maca​que-copyright-court-david-slater

#PETAsucks

I hope he gets to eat the monkey.


I wonder if monkey tastes like human.
 
2017-09-12 09:50:07 PM  
Peter Gabriel "Shock The Monkey"
Youtube QZ-bGjOU0BA


I heard PETA protested this song
 
2017-09-12 10:11:32 PM  
img.fark.netView Full Size

This is why they can never have anything nice.
 
2017-09-12 10:14:22 PM  
You read this headline to the tune of angry shrieking...
 
2017-09-12 10:34:18 PM  

Katolu: I was talking to my refrigerator, who happens to be a layer,  and he told me if a monkey isn't capable of paying the tax on an item the monkey cannot have ownership.


Don't give rich assholes ideas, or they'll start using their pets as tax shelters.

Get the right dog and it can be a tax Sheltie.
 
2017-09-12 10:48:32 PM  
I am so farking sick of that picture.
 
2017-09-12 10:56:00 PM  

uber humper: ThatGuyFromTheInternet: uber humper: Farking PETA bankrupted the poor guy:

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/jul/12/monkey-selfie-maca​que-copyright-court-david-slater

#PETAsucks

I hope he gets to eat the monkey.

I wonder if monkey tastes like human.


img.fark.netView Full Size
 
2017-09-12 11:21:13 PM  
We'll show them, especially for that purple monkey dishwasher remark.
 
2017-09-12 11:30:53 PM  
I still don't understand why PETA has any rights at all here.  It's not their picture.  It wasn't taken with their camera.  It's not their monkey.  Other than hiring lawyers, they aren't involved in any way.  They should have no more rights than I have.
 
2017-09-12 11:55:20 PM  
Yeah, I know.  The Simpsons said it first.

img.fark.netView Full Size
 
2017-09-13 12:22:55 AM  
FTA: If Naruto would have won, PETA said it would have donated all of the proceeds generated from the photos to protect the animal's habitat on the Tangkoko reserve on the Indonesian island of Sulawesi.

PETA: That animal owns his picture, and no one has the right to profit off it, so we are suing for the right to profit off it.

What. The. Fark?

I actually drove by PETA's head quarters in Norfolk last week. Stuck my hand out the window and gave them the bird as I drove by. As I do every time I drive by their building. Fark PETA and the adopted-from-a-cruelity-free-shelter high horse they road in on.
 
2017-09-13 12:26:47 AM  

EvilEgg: /actually I don't think a human would own exclusive rights to photos taken with someone else's gear


You'd be wrong, if the person pressing the shutter button was just borrowing the gear and not getting help in using it. In fact, I could steal your camera and own the rights to any photos I took with it, just like I'd have copyright in any novels I wrote with your stolen laptop.

If you set everything up in a photograph--focused it, set the aperture, hung the lights, and so forth--and I just pressed a button on your command, you'd probably be recognized as the "author." (Although I could make your lawyers sweat for it, if I wanted to sue you for a partial stake.) If there's anything more collaborative than that, I'm definitely at least part-author for copyright purposes.
 
2017-09-13 03:03:53 AM  
If Naruto would have won, PETA said it would have donated all of the proceeds generated from the photos to protect the animal's habitat on the Tangkoko reserve on the Indonesian island of Sulawesi.

Wait a minute. If Naruto is declared the rights holder, why would PETA be deciding what to do with the money? If you have rights, that means you're the one to exercise them.
 
2017-09-13 05:13:40 AM  
The monkey wasn't clothed and was below the age of majority. Obviously, it should be charged for manufacturing child pornography.
 
2017-09-13 06:06:03 AM  
I just want to say...

Awesome headline, subby.
 
2017-09-13 07:11:42 AM  

EvilEgg: If a tree can own itself, why shouldn't a monkey own a selfie?

/actually I don't think a human would own exclusive rights to photos taken with someone else's gear.


They would, under US Law the copyright belongs to those who took the picture.
 
2017-09-13 08:33:25 AM  
I should point out that Wikipedia is one of the villains in the story.  They were the ones who first argued that the photographer didn't own the copyright.
 
2017-09-13 08:57:12 AM  
I still don't get any of this regarding this monkey picture and I don't care to.
 
2017-09-13 09:15:10 AM  
MythDragon:

 Fark PETA and the adopted-from-a-cruelity-free-shelter high horse they road in on.

PETA wouldn't ride a horse, that would be animal slavery. They would set the horse free. By which I mean, they would secretly euthanize it.
 
2017-09-13 09:40:32 AM  
If Naruto would have won, PETA said it would have donated all of the proceeds generated from the photos to protect the animal's habitat on the Tangkoko reserve on the Indonesian island of Sulawesi.

But what if Naruto wanted to go on a drug fueled party rampage weekend with the proceeds?
 
2017-09-13 10:44:00 AM  
The trial wasn't to see if Naruto had any IP rights and what he wanted...  It was to see how much money PETA could get and spend from the profits of the book under the pretense of being what was best for him.

Because PETA could read the monkey's mind and knew exactly what it wanted to do with its monies.  And, of course, they know best; just ask them.

/now, given, PETA and monkeys could almost think on the same level of intelligence
//if the monkey was to dumb itself down
//And you doubled or tripled PETA's intelligence
 
2017-09-13 11:34:53 AM  

jjorsett: Wait a minute. If Naruto is declared the rights holder, why would PETA be deciding what to do with the money?


There's all sorts of circumstances under which party A can sue on behalf of party B, and use the proceeds for purposes deemed to be in B's interests. Unfortunately for PETA's clever strategy*, party B pretty much always has to be a human--or the corpse of a human, or a comatose human, or a very young human, or a defunct human organization, etc.

* Unfortunate for their clever legal strategy. Their actual strategy, which is to get people paying attention to PETA, is working pretty well.
 
2017-09-13 01:36:49 PM  

JuggleGeek: I should point out that Wikipedia is one of the villains in the story.  They were the ones who first argued that the photographer didn't own the copyright.


Um, how does that make them "villains"?? They're right: the monkey took the picture, therefore the picture falls under public domain... It was right there at the bottom of the article:

In 2014, US copyright regulators agreed with Wikipedia's conclusion and said that a "photograph taken by a monkey" is unprotected intellectual property. That's because, under US law, the intellectual property rights to photographs belong to the person who took them. Naruto is not a person under the law and, therefore, not entitled to own property.
 
2017-09-13 06:40:54 PM  

bigbadideasinaction: Katolu: I was talking to my refrigerator, who happens to be a layer,  and he told me if a monkey isn't capable of paying the tax on an item the monkey cannot have ownership.

Don't give rich assholes ideas, or they'll start using their pets as tax shelters.

Get the right dog and it can be a tax Sheltie.


You,  I like you.
 
Displayed 37 of 37 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking

On Twitter





Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report