Can a chimp take a selfie? And what does copyright have to do with this? You might think we’re just monkeying around, but a ‘Monkey Selfie’ case from 2011 has sparked a debate about ownership and copyright. In our latest Attune Legal blog, we unpack this case to answer key questions about ownership. Read on.
A closer look at the “Monkey Selfie” case
In 2011, a monkey in Indonesia by the name of Naruto took a selfie with a camera owned by nature photographer David Slater. The photogenic monkey quickly gained popularity when her smiling image went viral. This also sparked a debate between Slater, who claims ownership of the photo, and others who argue otherwise.
What’s important to note here is that David Slater did not press the shutter button of the camera, the monkey did. Meaning that the question of who owns a striking image captured by the crested black macaque isn’t as straightforward to answer.
According to the U.S. Copyright Office, the photo cannot be copyrighted by the person who owns the camera or any other entity, because it was not taken by a human.
After it was published online, Slater attempted to have Wikimedia take down the image from their “Commons” section, which features open-source material. However, the editors of the website refused, stating that neither Naruto the monkey, nor Slater owned the photo.
Further to this, American animal rights organisation PETA (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals) sued “on behalf” of the monkey in 2015, seeking financial control of the photographs for the benefit of Naruto.
Lawyers representing PETA and Mr Slater asked the US Court of Appeals to dismiss the case and throw out a lower-court decision that said animals cannot own copyrights.
In January 2016, U.S. District Judge William Orrick stated in a tentative opinion that there is no indication that the Copyright Act extends to animals.
Judge Orrick stated, “I’m not the person to weigh into this. This is an issue for Congress and the President.”
He also added, “If they think animals should have the right to copyright, they’re free to do so under the Constitution.”
The U.S. Copyright Office’s recently updated manual – the Compendium of U.S. Copyright Office Practices – also addresses the issue in Chapter 300. It states that copyright law only protects “the fruits of intellectual labor” that stem from the creative powers of the mind. This includes a photograph taken by a monkey, or a mural painted by an elephant”.
In Australia, this situation would probably be the same as, in general, a work can only be protected by copyright in Australia if there is a human author who contributed ‘independent intellectual effort’.
This brings us back to the initial question – can a monkey take a selfie and own the copyright? At this time, the answer is no, but it’s a topic that may be further explored in the future.
At Attune Legal, our team has extensive experience supporting clients and their businesses across the tech and utilities industries for commercial matters. If you would like to learn more about how we can assist you, get in touch via the Attune Legal website here.
