When A Primate Taught Lessons In Copyright!

Do animals use technology? If you see the recent scuffle between Wikimedia and wildlife photographer David Slater, one would see the need to find an answer to this question.

When the world came to accept the word Selfie, it didn’t think things would get this interesting that the word will gain a whole new ground when it comes to copyright issues!

This is what happened. It was in 2011 that David Slater visited one of the Indonesian parks to take some interesting pictures of black macaques. Just as he was fiddling with his numerous cameras, their accessories and related stuff, a macaque clinched the opportunity and caught hold of one of his high-end camera. Just as mischievous as the monkeys would be, the macaque took a perfect selfie with Slater’s camera before the man got it back.

It was a fantabulous shot. There wasn’t just one selfie; there were hundreds of them! David Slater had stepped on a gold mine since this could have been any wildife photographer’s dream come true! What more do you need when you have an animal which already knows how to use the technology and can give you a perfect shot? This was a super-recipe for the image to go viral. And, as guessed, it did go viral and reached unforeseen corners of the world. This was the image of a toothless macaque grinning into the camera like human child would smile innocently at a friend.

Sadly though, this image also turned out to be an inspiration for hundreds of memes and some so condescending that Slater decided to do something about this.

Since the image was in public domain such as Wikimedia, a non-profit organisation behind Wikipedia, Slater wrote to them asking for the image to be pulled down.

And this is where the most important discussion on copyright started. Wikimedia refused to pull down the image. The issue turned even murkier since Slater was not even the photographer in the said case!

How can someone, who isn’t the photographer or the one who pressed the button for the image to be captured, have the right over the image that he didn’t compose or plan or have any role in it being captured?

Wikimedia had its argument sound and valid. This image is in the public domain owing to the fact that a non-human animal had taken the image. When this is the case, how can a human hold permission for it owing to the mere fact that the equipment was his?

The most outdated US copyright law which had served the purpose for long, mentions whoever pushes the button holds the sole proprietorship over the image. So, in case you ask a relative to take a pic and a celebrity photobombs it, your relative has all the rights to sell the image to which ever agency he/she would prefer. In that sense, the monkey selfie has brought two arguments into light here.

One is whether Slater would hold 'any' right over the image. Second, are selfies so much in vogue that animals know it too? Either way, it would be a sorted discussion when the answers arrive.
(Image: Caters News Agency)