1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  1. Faldrax

    Faldrax

    Messages:
    1,013
    Name:
    Jonathan
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
  2. Ed Sutton

    Ed Sutton

    Messages:
    3,561
    Name:
    Dave
    Edit My Images:
    No
    Ceejay likes this.
  3. viv1969

    viv1969

    Messages:
    27,763
    Name:
    Bat-Frog
    Edit My Images:
    No
    Bunch of nutters.
    They're doing their cause no favours...in both cases.
    In fact in the vegan case, they're just furthering the opinion of vegans as "just a little bit weird".
    Be a vegan...knock yourself out; just leave the (vast majority of the) rest of us out of it.
     
    Ceejay and Graham W like this.
  4. ianp5a

    ianp5a

    Messages:
    4,234
    Name:
    Ian
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Last edited: Sep 12, 2017
    DizMatt likes this.
  5. wezza13

    wezza13

    Messages:
    2,550
    Name:
    Wez
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Ceejay and Dave70D like this.
  6. Dave70D

    Dave70D

    Messages:
    4,025
    Name:
    FujiDaveXX
    Edit My Images:
    No
    100% Agree, this should NEVER of gone to court in the first place :)
     
    Ceejay and wezza13 like this.
  7. gramps

    gramps

    Messages:
    29,120
    Edit My Images:
    No
    and it took 2 years for judges to reach that decision! :banghead:
     
    Ceejay likes this.
  8. Byker28i

    Byker28i

    Messages:
    17,791
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    However - he has reached a compromise of donating 25% of any income to protection of the environment.
    I did like his argument that the monkey wasn't the one Peta claimed...
     
    LCPete likes this.
  9. boyfalldown

    boyfalldown

    Messages:
    15,278
    Name:
    Hugh
    Edit My Images:
    No
    Peta are pushing this so hard because a result for them would mean animals are capable f owning property and a whole heap of other rights, if they won this one they know it'll have some far reaching implications for their cause
     
    Cobra likes this.
  10. Byker28i

    Byker28i

    Messages:
    17,791
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Muzzieman and wezza13 like this.
  11. Dave70D

    Dave70D

    Messages:
    4,025
    Name:
    FujiDaveXX
    Edit My Images:
    No

    IMO peta should be forced to pay the Photographer 1,000s, have to say sorry we are totally out of order for being idiots,fools and stupid. IMO peta are scum and want to carry on and ruin the Copyright owner.
     
    Jesus Quintana and wezza13 like this.
  12. Mozthecat

    Mozthecat

    Messages:
    56
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    What will this do for Wikipedia's stance on the image I wonder?
     
  13. Paul Wasensteiner

    Paul Wasensteiner

    Messages:
    1
    Name:
    Paul
    Edit My Images:
    No
    All he had to do was say that "actually I took the photo. The monkey grabbed the camera but I pushed the shutter release". Done. All credit then goes to the photographer.
     
  14. DizMatt

    DizMatt

    Messages:
    3,710
    Name:
    urrrm.... Matt
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    finally and yes, I'd invoice PETA for their use of the photo!
     
  15. Jesus Quintana

    Jesus Quintana

    Messages:
    558
    Name:
    Mark
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Disgusting. I feel for the photographer as it never should have gone this far. PETA used dirty tactics too, using a US court to try to win. I'm glad common sense has prevailed but this sho never have gone to court, let alone take 2 years to sort out.
     
  16. BillN_33

    BillN_33

    Messages:
    11,606
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    one for the European Court of Justice ....... they should get on well together as they are all a set of monkeys
     
  17. boyfalldown

    boyfalldown

    Messages:
    15,278
    Name:
    Hugh
    Edit My Images:
    No
    I happen to agree completely. But, I don't think PETA's motivation was to gain a few $000 for the monkey. This quote from them gives it away

    Had they won, then they've have had a court ruling that an animal can own property they' would be using that for every campaign they want
     
    Last edited: Sep 12, 2017
  18. Paul-H

    Paul-H

    Messages:
    937
    Edit My Images:
    No
    Good use of their donated funds, just how many thousands would they have spent on this ?
     
    antonroland and Jesus Quintana like this.
  19. ancient_mariner

    ancient_mariner

    Messages:
    7,173
    Name:
    Toni
    Edit My Images:
    No
    I hope the togger was awarded costs. Hopefully this will set some kind of precedent, though fom what I've read it probably will not.
     
  20. Yvette Smith

    Yvette Smith

    Messages:
    13
    Edit My Images:
    No
    As I understand it, the case was settled out of court, and the photographer has agreed to pay 25% of future profits to suitable animal charities. I read somewhere that he was in dire financial straits because of PETA, and probably agreed to the 25% to bring it to an end. Doesn't seem fair to have to do that, but at least he didn't have to give it to PETA!
     
  21. Csaba

    Csaba

    Messages:
    38
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    My thoughts exactly.

    I would be furious if one of the charities that I give money to behaved like this.
     
  22. ancient_mariner

    ancient_mariner

    Messages:
    7,173
    Name:
    Toni
    Edit My Images:
    No
    TBH I suspect the kind of people who support PETA would be glad to see someone who 'used animals' being abused at their expense.
     
  23. BruceMo

    BruceMo

    Messages:
    2,468
    Name:
    Bruce
    Edit My Images:
    No
    They should have paid for a proper lawyer, pay peanuts......... :D
     
    ChrisHeathcote likes this.
  24. Keith W

    Keith W Rudolph

    Messages:
    8,431
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Oh dear

    The exit door is that way ►►►►►►
     
    BruceMo likes this.
  25. KTC

    KTC

    Messages:
    10
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    The BBC (and others) have since updated it, but the photographer didn't win the case, the two sides settled. And a settlement where DS agreed to give money to certain charities that he previously weren't required to is hardly winning....

    Nothing, even if the settlement is accepted by the court. In fact, one of the reason probably for both sides to agree to the settlement was wanting to vacant the lower court ruling that animals cannot hold copyright, which suited neither side in this case.

    Yeah, hello fraud charges and civil suits for getting money previously for claiming the monkey took the photo.

    The only precedent that will be set is if the appeal court refused to vacant the lower court judgment as part of the settlement, in which case a clear court ruling that animals cannot hold copyright (in the US).

    https://www.techdirt.com/articles/2...val-peta-cant-settle-monkey-selfie-case.shtml :beer:
     
  26. Major Eazy

    Major Eazy

    Messages:
    642
    Edit My Images:
    No
    How would any of you feel if you were to borrow my camera, take a photo, give back my camera, then I claim copyright of the photo and live off the royalties?

    If you were to say "I'll sue you!" then you would be proving a point: The copyright belongs to whoever took the photo, not whom the camera belong to.

    Same for if you borrowed my car, drove over the speed limit, give back my car, I expect you to pay the fine. It may be my car, but you broken the speed limit, because you were driving.

    It may be his camera, but the monkey took the selfie.

    If this happened to me, I would be donating 100% of income from the monkey selfie to WWF, so since all funding for monkey selfie is going to WWF, there would be no reason for PETA to take me to court. Unless all members of Talk Photography plan to take me to court and claim I should be getting 100% of the income and full copyright for the monkey selfie?
     
  27. Mr Badger

    Mr Badger

    Messages:
    894
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    I believe that Winnie the Pooh should perhaps consider taking legal advice from counsel about invasion of privacy and body shaming (remember the graphic coverage of that incident where he got stuck in rabbit's burrow after eating too much honey?). ;)
     
    Last edited: Sep 15, 2017 at 4:34 PM
  28. GreenNinja67

    GreenNinja67

    Messages:
    2,181
    Name:
    Terry
    Edit My Images:
    Yes

    I believe he used a remote Tigger
     
    GordonM, Faldrax, johnf3f and 5 others like this.
  29. Mr Badger

    Mr Badger

    Messages:
    894
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    :LOL: Very good!
     
  30. Cobra

    Cobra Mr Magoo Staff Member

    Messages:
    80,738
    Name:
    Phitt, Hissy Phitt
    Edit My Images:
    No
    Eeaw not to have eaten all the honey, purely his own fault as far as I'm concerned, the little piglet ..

    Ok I'm done :D
     
    KTC and wezza13 like this.
  31. Keith W

    Keith W Rudolph

    Messages:
    8,431
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    I'll just leave this here....


    [​IMG]
     
  32. Mr Badger

    Mr Badger

    Messages:
    894
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    There's no need to be Roo d about him! :D :coat:
     
    KTC and Cobra like this.
  33. Cobra

    Cobra Mr Magoo Staff Member

    Messages:
    80,738
    Name:
    Phitt, Hissy Phitt
    Edit My Images:
    No
    No need to Rabbit-in :(
     
    KTC and Mr Badger like this.
  34. ancient_mariner

    ancient_mariner

    Messages:
    7,173
    Name:
    Toni
    Edit My Images:
    No
    Or indeed to 'Owl about it.
     
    Cobra and Mr Badger like this.
  35. ianp5a

    ianp5a

    Messages:
    4,234
    Name:
    Ian
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    I don't want to Badger you but I Toad you this would spread to other stories. There must a Mole in here somewhere.
     
    Last edited: Sep 17, 2017 at 1:33 PM
    Mr Badger likes this.
  36. Robert Davies

    Robert Davies

    Messages:
    696
    Name:
    Robert
    Edit My Images:
    No
    Eeyore to have known better really….
     
  37. viv1969

    viv1969

    Messages:
    27,763
    Name:
    Bat-Frog
    Edit My Images:
    No
    But the monkey cannot hold copyright.
    Kind of the crux of the whole matter.
     
    wezza13 likes this.
  38. simon ess

    simon ess

    Messages:
    6,383
    Edit My Images:
    No
    Bluekwack, Faldrax and Nostromo like this.
  39. Major Eazy

    Major Eazy

    Messages:
    642
    Edit My Images:
    No
    Although the monkey can't hold the copyright as in the sense of giving or refusing permissions for the selfie to be published in magazines, books, etc, and keep the royalties (unless the royalties are paid in bananas). The photographer however could give away the copyright and make the monkey selfie a public domain, so he can't get paid for a photograph he never took, even if it was his camera. Also other option is that photographer could hold the copyright, but in the sense of being similar to an adult acting as the trustee of a bank account on behalf for an underage child. He give or refuse permissions for the monkey selfie to be published, but he could donate the full 100% income and fees for the monkey selfie to WWF.
     
  40. viv1969

    viv1969

    Messages:
    27,763
    Name:
    Bat-Frog
    Edit My Images:
    No
    In any sense. Hell, the monkey, if still living, is unaware that it even took a selfie. It's not sitting each day, fretting over lost income, wringing it's hands and writing bitter letters to the papers from "outraged of Indonesia". Nor is it suffering from a raging case of GAS, desperate to have another go.

    It's ridiculous case. Just PETA on another self righteous fools errand. An attempt to garner publicity for their cause, and it worked; just not in the way they'd hoped, I suspect.
     

Share This Page