this post was submitted on 03 Jun 2024
182 points (96.9% liked)

Today I Learned

17792 readers
1117 users here now

What did you learn today? Share it with us!

We learn something new every day. This is a community dedicated to informing each other and helping to spread knowledge.

The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:

Rules (interactive)


Rule 1- All posts must begin with TIL. Linking to a source of info is optional, but highly recommended as it helps to spark discussion.

** Posts must be about an actual fact that you have learned, but it doesn't matter if you learned it today. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.**



Rule 2- Your post subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.

Your post subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.



Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.

Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.



Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.

That's it.



Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.

Posts and comments which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.



Rule 6- Regarding non-TIL posts.

Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-TIL posts using the [META] tag on your post title.



Rule 7- You can't harass or disturb other members.

If you vocally harass or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.

Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.

For further explanation, clarification and feedback about this rule, you may follow this link.



Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.



Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.

Let everyone have their own content.



Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here.

Unless included in our Whitelist for Bots, your bot will not be allowed to participate in this community. To have your bot whitelisted, please contact the moderators for a short review.



Partnered Communities

You can view our partnered communities list by following this link. To partner with our community and be included, you are free to message the moderators or comment on a pinned post.

Community Moderation

For inquiry on becoming a moderator of this community, you may comment on the pinned post of the time, or simply shoot a message to the current moderators.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

The EFF soon created a crossword, overlaid it on top of the monkey, and featured it on their website.

August 2014 – Photographer David Slater sent a copyright takedown notice to the Wikimedia Commons over a photograph of a Celebes crested macaque taken on one of his cameras, which at the time was being operated by the macaque, resulting in a "monkey selfie". The Wikimedia Foundation dismissed the claims, asserting that the photograph, having been taken by a non-human animal, rather than Slater, is in the public domain per United States law.[277][278] Subsequently, a court in San Francisco ruled copyright protection could not be applied to the monkey and a University of Michigan law professor said "the original monkey selfie is in the public domain."[279]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monkey_selfie_copyright_dispute :

In September 2015, PETA filed a lawsuit against Slater and Blurb, requesting that the copyright be assigned to the macaque and that PETA be appointed to administer proceeds from the photos for the endangered species' benefit.[6] In dismissing PETA's case, a federal district court ruled that a monkey cannot own copyright under US law.[7] PETA appealed.

In May 2018, Condé Nast Entertainment acquired the rights from Slater to make a documentary film related to the monkey selfie dispute. The project was being overseen by Dawn Ostroff and Jeremy Steckler.[55]

top 17 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] radix@lemmy.world 73 points 5 months ago (3 children)

Also PETA got involved, because they've never seen an animal-centric story they couldn't weasel themselves into.

[–] Kolanaki@yiffit.net 44 points 5 months ago (2 children)

Did they try to euthanize the monkey?

[–] Aatube@kbin.melroy.org 10 points 5 months ago

They tried to drag them into the horrors of the copyright world

[–] FiniteBanjo 9 points 5 months ago (1 children)

I used to stream MHFU like ten years ago and the best comment I ever got was "YO, Peta should hire this man."

[–] CaptainEffort@sh.itjust.works 10 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Monster Hunter Freedom Unite?

[–] FiniteBanjo 6 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Nah, Momma Hoss: Food Universe on the GBA.

[–] CaptainEffort@sh.itjust.works 7 points 5 months ago

I hate that I literally googled that…

[–] fsxylo@sh.itjust.works 21 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

Lol, of course they wanted the proceeds. Peta and shameless whoring, name a more iconic duo.

[–] Aatube@kbin.melroy.org 7 points 5 months ago

Added relevant quote

[–] gedaliyah@lemmy.world 58 points 5 months ago (3 children)

This is actually a really famous and interesting copyright case that established some important bounds of copyright. How much of an artist's intent is necessary to claim copyright? Can an artist set up a situation in which some creative product is produced?

There is actually a lot of animal photography that is dependent on the animal itself to trigger the camera, such as trail photos or even those cute photos of squirrels interacting with dollhouse furniture like tiny little humans. There is a lot of meticulous planning, experimentation, and patience that goes into "spontaneous" photographs.

[–] ShepherdPie@midwest.social 24 points 5 months ago

The headline definitely makes it sound dumb, but this does seem like an interesting argument regardless of which side you fall on.

[–] brbposting@sh.itjust.works 15 points 5 months ago

Good points.

Suing Wiki ain’t chill but I do feel for somebody who purposely arranged to get a monkey to hold a camera - must’ve taken forever

[–] graymess@lemmy.world 14 points 5 months ago

This also set a huge precedent for legal cases around AI image generation, didn't it? Since that also falls under "works not created by a human" and are therefore not copyrightable. We could have been dealing with a much bleaker AI art law situation than we have today because of this funny monkey photo case.

[–] acockworkorange@mander.xyz 13 points 5 months ago

Most sane PETA activism.

[–] shneancy@lemmy.world 8 points 5 months ago

as a photographer this feels weird, there's much more to photography than just pressing the button

[–] Lemjukes@lemm.ee 2 points 5 months ago (1 children)

There’s a great episode of Hello Internet where they talk about this.

https://youtu.be/VmOuW5zTt9w?si=qYDehh-BK8Fer162

[–] PipedLinkBot@feddit.rocks 3 points 5 months ago

Here is an alternative Piped link(s):

https://piped.video/VmOuW5zTt9w?si=qYDehh-BK8Fer162

Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.

I'm open-source; check me out at GitHub.