| Author | Thread |
|
|
09/24/2015 07:34:33 PM · #1 |
If not, why not!
This article from Slate tells of the monkey story if you missed it so far. |
|
|
|
09/24/2015 07:49:53 PM · #2 |
Originally posted by sfalice:
If not, why not! |
Because my browser will not display whatever is being provided by "googleadservices.com" ... |
|
|
|
09/24/2015 08:18:26 PM · #3 |
Adorable shot!
I wonder how well he'd have done a "selfie" if someone else had not set up the shot.
|
|
|
|
09/24/2015 09:01:22 PM · #4 |
Originally posted by Lydia:
Adorable shot!
I wonder how well he'd have done a "selfie" if someone else had not set up the shot. |
NOBODY set that shot up, that's the *hook* here: the monkey stole his camera, and this one and others made hundreds of shots, apparently entranced by the sound of the shutter. This one happened to be a great shot. According to the article, an argument for copyright *could* be made if the photographer HAD set up a shot, tripod 'n lights et cetera, then stepped out for a smoke and someone else used his setup, but apparently in this case there IS no copyright because only humans can own copyrights and no human made that shot.
Makes you wonder how they deal with the space-telescope photos, but actually I think they DO have all those available in the public domain too. |
|
|
|
09/24/2015 09:04:46 PM · #5 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Originally posted by Lydia:
Adorable shot!
I wonder how well he'd have done a "selfie" if someone else had not set up the shot. |
NOBODY set that shot up, that's the *hook* here: the monkey stole his camera, and this one and others made hundreds of shots, apparently entranced by the sound of the shutter. This one happened to be a great shot. According to the article, an argument for copyright *could* be made if the photographer HAD set up a shot, tripod 'n lights et cetera, then stepped out for a smoke and someone else used his setup, but apparently in this case there IS no copyright because only humans can own copyrights and no human made that shot.
Makes you wonder how they deal with the space-telescope photos, but actually I think they DO have all those available in the public domain too. |
Fair enough, but... I actually meant... "set up the camera settings".
If it's a cellphone or a go-pro or... then I bow out gracefully. :D
|
|
|
|
09/24/2015 09:51:03 PM · #6 |
I would have given that copyright to the macaque in a moment if said macaque had also pulled the memory card,
inserted it into a handy nearby computer and then processed it so that it could be seen by the multitudes.
:) |
|
|
|
09/24/2015 11:49:55 PM · #7 |
| Whoa! You mean my old photo lab owns the copyright on all those boxes of Ektachrome I have laying around? Jejeje... |
|
|
|
09/24/2015 11:56:48 PM · #8 |
| If the photographer had not let on that that particular photo was taken while his camera was in the clutches of the monkey he probably wouldn't have to defend his right to it. But would it still be seen as such an amazing photo? |
|
|
|
09/25/2015 07:35:18 AM · #9 |
| There will be a discussion of this case on today's Forum program on KQED radio (live streaming available, podcast later). |
|
|
|
09/25/2015 11:59:08 AM · #10 |
| People who think that this photographer shouldn't have copyright to the photo remind me of the people who think there is no luck in chess. |
|
|
|
09/25/2015 12:21:29 PM · #11 |
| and that monkey stole the camera. |
|
|
|
09/25/2015 12:48:27 PM · #12 |
Originally posted by posthumous:
People who think that this photographer shouldn't have copyright to the photo remind me of the people who think there is no luck in chess. |
Still pondering this one :-) |
|
|
|
09/25/2015 12:54:51 PM · #13 |
| Maybe if he'd just given the monkey a banana when retrieving the camera he'd own the copyright as a "work for hire" ... |
|
|
|
09/25/2015 02:04:07 PM · #14 |
Originally posted by tnun:
and that monkey stole the camera. |
Originally posted by Lydia:
I actually meant... "set up the camera settings". |
So if I steal the pencil that you sharpened and write the great american novel, does that mean you own the copyright?
Or better yet, if a monkey steals your typewriter and pounds out shakespeare ... :-) |
|
|
|
09/25/2015 02:29:40 PM · #15 |
| something about not profiting from one's crime... |
|
|
|
09/25/2015 05:43:29 PM · #16 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Originally posted by posthumous:
People who think that this photographer shouldn't have copyright to the photo remind me of the people who think there is no luck in chess. |
Still pondering this one :-) |
some people insist that there is no luck in chess because each player moves in turn and can make whichever move s/he deems best. By that logic, there is no luck in craps either, because dice are not truly random: they follow the laws of physics and their outcome directly depends on their starting position and how they are rolled from the hand. If you don't think these are comparable, look up how many possible chess games there are.
such people remind me of those who say that creativity is a matter of control, one person forcing his/her materials to combine in a certain way. They do not understand the difference between imagination and will. Some of us photographers find a situation and bring our camera to it, hoping for a minor miracle. Art is as much serendipity as it is manipulation. Photographers in general should be more sympathetic to this idea than any other artist, because we have the least control of all the arts. Our camera does a mindboggling amount of work for us.
I have mixed feelings about copyright in general, but this poor guy deserves his as much as any of us deserve ours. |
|
|
|
09/25/2015 06:38:00 PM · #17 |
Originally posted by posthumous:
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Originally posted by posthumous:
People who think that this photographer shouldn't have copyright to the photo remind me of the people who think there is no luck in chess. |
Still pondering this one :-) |
some people insist that there is no luck in chess because each player moves in turn and can make whichever move s/he deems best. By that logic, there is no luck in craps either, because dice are not truly random: they follow the laws of physics and their outcome directly depends on their starting position and how they are rolled from the hand. If you don't think these are comparable, look up how many possible chess games there are.
such people remind me of those who say that creativity is a matter of control, one person forcing his/her materials to combine in a certain way. They do not understand the difference between imagination and will. Some of us photographers find a situation and bring our camera to it, hoping for a minor miracle. Art is as much serendipity as it is manipulation. Photographers in general should be more sympathetic to this idea than any other artist, because we have the least control of all the arts. Our camera does a mindboggling amount of work for us.
I have mixed feelings about copyright in general, but this poor guy deserves his as much as any of us deserve ours. |
Okay, that makes sense. Lovely exegesis. |
|
|
|
09/25/2015 07:30:19 PM · #18 |
Can't believe you guys glossed over the funniest thing on the page:
.............................
Top Comment
Give a million monkeys a million cameras and .... never mind; Instagram. |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Prints! -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2024 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 04/16/2024 05:13:08 PM EDT.
