Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Monkey’s selfie cannot be copyrighted, US regulators say [View all]PoliticAverse
(26,366 posts)21. Here is the mentioned section of the compendium:
306 The Human Authorship Requirement
The U.S. Copyright Office will register an original work of authorship, provided that the
work was created by a human being.
The copyright law only protects the fruits of intellectual labor that are founded in the
creative powers of the mind. Trade-Mark Cases, 100 U.S. 82, 94 (1879). Because
copyright law is limited to original intellectual conceptions of the author, the Office
will refuse to register a claim if it determines that a human being did not create the
work. Burrow-Giles Lithographic Co. v. Sarony, 111 U.S. 53, 58 (1884).
The Office will not register works produced by nature, animals, or plants. Likewise, the
Office cannot register a work purportedly created by divine or supernatural beings,
although the Office may register a work where the application or the deposit copy(ies)
state that the work was inspired by a divine spirit.
Examples:
A photograph taken by a monkey.
A mural painted by an elephant.
A claim based on the appearance of actual animal skin.
A claim based on driftwood that has been shaped and smoothed by
the ocean.
A claim based on cut marks, defects, and other qualities found in
natural stone.
An application for a song naming the Holy Spirit as the author of the
work
The U.S. Copyright Office will register an original work of authorship, provided that the
work was created by a human being.
The copyright law only protects the fruits of intellectual labor that are founded in the
creative powers of the mind. Trade-Mark Cases, 100 U.S. 82, 94 (1879). Because
copyright law is limited to original intellectual conceptions of the author, the Office
will refuse to register a claim if it determines that a human being did not create the
work. Burrow-Giles Lithographic Co. v. Sarony, 111 U.S. 53, 58 (1884).
The Office will not register works produced by nature, animals, or plants. Likewise, the
Office cannot register a work purportedly created by divine or supernatural beings,
although the Office may register a work where the application or the deposit copy(ies)
state that the work was inspired by a divine spirit.
Examples:
A photograph taken by a monkey.
A mural painted by an elephant.
A claim based on the appearance of actual animal skin.
A claim based on driftwood that has been shaped and smoothed by
the ocean.
A claim based on cut marks, defects, and other qualities found in
natural stone.
An application for a song naming the Holy Spirit as the author of the
work
Direct link to the full compendium (.pdf, 9.7MB): http://copyright.gov/comp3/docs/compendium-full.pdf
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
54 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Funny, recent stories I've been reading about this says the photog claimed
justiceischeap
Aug 2014
#3
Thank you. I thought it could've used more contrast, but I'm still happy with it.
bluesbassman
Aug 2014
#17
I disagree> the photographer owned the camera, the film and thus the rights to the images
KittyWampus
Aug 2014
#11
Having an animal take a picture is the exact same as simply having ones camera
KittyWampus
Aug 2014
#27
a monkey isn't a person. Thus the photos are the same as if photographer had set camera up
KittyWampus
Aug 2014
#28
I think that's the problem. If he had offered to sell the original film, which he owns, before the p
cbdo2007
Aug 2014
#39
The monkey must specifically transfer the copyright, mere payment isn't enough
PoliticAverse
Aug 2014
#15
You can submit an opinion/comment on the matter to the copyright office...
PoliticAverse
Aug 2014
#19