What's new
By:
Photoshop Gurus Forum

Welcome to Photoshop Gurus forum. Register a free account today to become a member! It's completely free. Once signed in, you'll enjoy an ad-free experience and be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

The Monkey Selfie Issue.....


C'mon, how could this position even be set for the shot? It would have to be exactly postioned on the tripod to get the face in the right position, and the monkey's arms are not moving. It would have to have accidentally found the shutter release (is that what it's called?) button to activate the picture.

And that is before the controversy of who owns the selfie. Is it really a selfie at all?
 
MrTom said:
So what if the camera was on self-timer?
Would the Camera then have ownership?
Click to expand...

:rocker:

When the camera no longer functions, are the following cameras the heirs and do the heirs of the camera then retain rights to the ownership?

A camera then "legally succeds to the place of [the deceased] and assumes the rights and obligations of the deceased . . . [and] the possessory rights to property."
 
So...(in the UK), the DVLA and the Home office actively encourage us to use copyrighted images for our passport and drivers' licences then?

If I have a passport photo taken in a photo booth who owns it then?
The booth?
Am I in breech of copyright if I then send that to the Home Office for use as 'MY' passport photo?

Looks like the fuzz will have you bang to rights too...
Officer: Can I see your drivers licence please?
Me: Certainly officer, by the way I didn't take that photo on my licence...
Officer: Take a seat in the back of my car for a moment would you.

The whole things a joke...is it April already?

Grrrr.

Regards.
MrTom.
 
If copyright can not be determined by who snapped the image, in this case the monkey's, then shouldn't the next logical step be who's equipment was used to capture the image. If the monkey's were not in a legal agreement to rent the camera, then the ownership of any images captured by that camera would fall to the owner of the camera.

I don't know!!!!

If I ask Tom to take a quick photo of me and my GF in front of the Museum of Natural History, who owns copyright to that image? I do, it was my camera!
 
This is a really interesting topic. I actually just finished a course on mass media law, although that was only on the policies in the United States.

I obviously can't speak for the UK, but I'm the US if you consent to having your photo taken in a booth, or at the DMV the photo is public domain. That being said the photo is understood to be for official use only, so you shouldn't expect to see it anywhere but where it should be.
Photos like these fall under tacit consent laws as I'm sure you don't remember signing a contract with the DMV about a photo.

The US doesn't have a policy for animal selfies either, in part I think to the fact that selfies weren't a thing until recently. If I had to guess though I imagine courts here would side in favor of the photographer. His camera, his "film", his picture. The picture is not public domain because he subject in question, "curious monkey", doesn't have the ability to consent to having it's picture taken or published and can thereby not be considered as a determining factor for ownership of the photo.
 
Back
Top