I wonder how well he'd have done a "selfie" if someone else had not set up the shot.
NOBODY set that shot up, that's the *hook* here: the monkey stole his camera, and this one and others made hundreds of shots, apparently entranced by the sound of the shutter. This one happened to be a great shot. According to the article, an argument for copyright *could* be made if the photographer HAD set up a shot, tripod 'n lights et cetera, then stepped out for a smoke and someone else used his setup, but apparently in this case there IS no copyright because only humans can own copyrights and no human made that shot.
Makes you wonder how they deal with the space-telescope photos, but actually I think they DO have all those available in the public domain too.
I wonder how well he'd have done a "selfie" if someone else had not set up the shot.
NOBODY set that shot up, that's the *hook* here: the monkey stole his camera, and this one and others made hundreds of shots, apparently entranced by the sound of the shutter. This one happened to be a great shot. According to the article, an argument for copyright *could* be made if the photographer HAD set up a shot, tripod 'n lights et cetera, then stepped out for a smoke and someone else used his setup, but apparently in this case there IS no copyright because only humans can own copyrights and no human made that shot.
Makes you wonder how they deal with the space-telescope photos, but actually I think they DO have all those available in the public domain too.
Fair enough, but... I actually meant... "set up the camera settings".
If it's a cellphone or a go-pro or... then I bow out gracefully. :D
I would have given that copyright to the macaque in a moment if said macaque had also pulled the memory card,
inserted it into a handy nearby computer and then processed it so that it could be seen by the multitudes.
:)
If the photographer had not let on that that particular photo was taken while his camera was in the clutches of the monkey he probably wouldn't have to defend his right to it. But would it still be seen as such an amazing photo?
People who think that this photographer shouldn't have copyright to the photo remind me of the people who think there is no luck in chess.
Still pondering this one :-)
some people insist that there is no luck in chess because each player moves in turn and can make whichever move s/he deems best. By that logic, there is no luck in craps either, because dice are not truly random: they follow the laws of physics and their outcome directly depends on their starting position and how they are rolled from the hand. If you don't think these are comparable, look up how many possible chess games there are.
such people remind me of those who say that creativity is a matter of control, one person forcing his/her materials to combine in a certain way. They do not understand the difference between imagination and will. Some of us photographers find a situation and bring our camera to it, hoping for a minor miracle. Art is as much serendipity as it is manipulation. Photographers in general should be more sympathetic to this idea than any other artist, because we have the least control of all the arts. Our camera does a mindboggling amount of work for us.
I have mixed feelings about copyright in general, but this poor guy deserves his as much as any of us deserve ours.
People who think that this photographer shouldn't have copyright to the photo remind me of the people who think there is no luck in chess.
Still pondering this one :-)
some people insist that there is no luck in chess because each player moves in turn and can make whichever move s/he deems best. By that logic, there is no luck in craps either, because dice are not truly random: they follow the laws of physics and their outcome directly depends on their starting position and how they are rolled from the hand. If you don't think these are comparable, look up how many possible chess games there are.
such people remind me of those who say that creativity is a matter of control, one person forcing his/her materials to combine in a certain way. They do not understand the difference between imagination and will. Some of us photographers find a situation and bring our camera to it, hoping for a minor miracle. Art is as much serendipity as it is manipulation. Photographers in general should be more sympathetic to this idea than any other artist, because we have the least control of all the arts. Our camera does a mindboggling amount of work for us.
I have mixed feelings about copyright in general, but this poor guy deserves his as much as any of us deserve ours.
