They get millions of dollars of free advertising for their organization. Therefore they can claim success and draw down more donations.
PETA is the Trump of animal rights groups.
7 Likes
Like MPAA, or RIAA, or Getty?
7 Likes
Not true, Duchamp signed them. Already famous, he was making a conscious point about art making, so his signature made all the difference. David J. Slater’s signature will not have the same effect.
1 Like
PETA is great at getting attention for stupid stuff, but in this case, there is probably a bigger agenda. There is a real movement for animals to have rights. If they succeed in getting this monkey recognized as a copyright holder, it opens up the door for more legal rights to be granted to animals.
2 Likes
Property isn’t in question in this case, only an immaterial monopoly.
There are species of ants that keep aphids as livestock. Herding Aphids: How 'Farmer' Ants Keep Control Of Their Food | ScienceDaily
8 Likes
Goddammit. Now I’ve gotta go git all Kind Hearts and Coronets on their asses too?
3 Likes
How does PETA even claim to have standing in this case? They do not represent the monkey, and they have been in no way harmed by the photographer’s copyright. If they win, I would not trust them to use the secured funds responsibly. PETA is a bunch of flaming assholes, and should be treated as such.
4 Likes
Awareness that PETA are a bunch of grandstanding idiots who should not be trusted around animals or humans.
3 Likes
Is there a particular legal opinion on this being a “legitimate” attempt to redefine animal rights versus a hacky publicity stunt?
I’m curious about a professional’s opinion.
1 Like
i want the monkey to lose because it was PETA that brought up the Case
Also couldn’t it be argued that the monkey Stole the Camera their for he has no right for copyright while using that Camera ?
1 Like
Well, there’s the solution. Have the monkey incorporate!
5 Likes
Send PETA a 100K bill for equipment rental, transportation, and equipment delivery fee.
2 Likes
On the basis that they are a significant enough organization to be allowed court time to defend their views. I don’t agree with all of their views, but I believe that giving them the opportunity to defend even the weirdest of them before a court is a sign of health for a working democracy.
2 Likes
Pffft big deal.
Only if they can find a kangaroo to try the case.
11 Likes
Art, its a funny old game.
1 Like
Those with knowledge of intellectual property law: is it possible that the court could rule that neither the photographer nor the macaque has claim to copyright on grounds of non-agency and non-personhood respectively? And if so, does that automatically place the photo in public domain?
2 Likes
