CALL US: 206.533.3854
CALL US  206.533.3854

Monkey Selfie Causes Copyright Confusion

With monkey selfies,
Who owns rights to the photo?
Copyright quandary.

The US Copyright Office has decided that a selfie taken by a monkey is not eligible for copyright protection under US law. The issue arose because British wildlife photographer David J. Slater claimed that he owned the rights to a self-portrait of a female Celebes crested macaque (Macaca nigra). The monkey took the photo of herself with Slater’s camera. Slater requested that the Wikimedia Foundation remove the photo of the monkey (shown above) from Wikimedia Commons. The foundation refused, saying that copyright belonged to the “person” who took the photo and in this case there was no person – monkeys not being recognized as “persons” under the law.

Slater argued that the monkey was his “assistant,” and that if he had a human assistant to help him take photos he would still own the copyrights in the resulting images. The US Copyright Offices recently updated its rules and regulations to make explicit that works produced by nature, animals, or plants are not protected by copyright, nor are works “purportedly created by divine or supernatural beings” (ghosts, for example). However, the Office may register a work “where the application or the deposit copy(ies) state that the work was inspired by a divine spirit.” (Emphasis added.)

The draft Compendium of Copyright Office Practices says (in Section 202.02(b)):

Human author: The term “authorship” implies that, for a work to be copyrightable, it must owe its origin to a human being.

The Copyright Office gives the following examples of “works produced by mechanical processes or random selection without any contribution by a human author” and thus not registrable:

• 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.

Medical images produced by “x-rays, ultrasounds, magnetic resonance imaging, or other diagnostic equipment” are also not capable of being registered for copyright protection. Presumably, an image of the Virgin Mary on toast would also be unprotected.

Related Articles

Buying Rival’s Trademark as Keyword Search Doesn’t Violate Lanham Act

The Ninth Circuit has affirmed a district court’s grant of summary judgment for the defendant in a case in which the plaintiff law firm claimed ...
Read More

What does copyright law have to do with McDonalds ice cream machines?

The US Copyright Office has granted a copyright exemption giving restaurants the right to repair broken equipment by bypassing locks intended to prevent anyone other ...
Read More

What’s Happening with AI and Copyright Law

Not surprisingly, a lot is happening at the intersection of artificial intelligence (AI) and intellectual property (IP) law. Here’s a roundup of some recent developments ...
Read More

Let's work together.

Contact us to set up a meeting with an attorney or team member.

Stay Informed

Sign up to receive Patent Poetry—a monthly roundup of key IP issues in our signature haiku format. Four articles (only 68 syllables); zero hassle.

SECTORS

HIGH
TECHNOLOGY

Artificial Intelligence

Blockchain & Cryptocurrency

Computer Technology & Software

Consumer Electronics

Electrical Devices

MECHANICAL
& PRODUCTS​

Cleantech

Mechanical Devices

Consumer & Retail Products

Hardware & Tools

Toys & Games

LIFE SCIENCES
& CHEMISTRY​

Biotechnology

Chemical Compounds

Digital Health

Healthcare Products

Pharmaceuticals

BRANDING
& CREATIVE​

Books & Publications

Brand Creation

Luxury Products

Photography & Video

Product Design

call us  206.533.3854