Lawsuit Filed Over Monkey Selfie Copyright Claim Against Photographer, Debating Legal Ownership Rights
In a landmark ruling, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit has determined that a primate cannot own a copyright under U.S. law. The case, known as Naruto v. Slater (2018), centered around a series of selfies taken by a macaque monkey using a photographer’s camera.
The case began when the animal rights group PETA filed a lawsuit, arguing that the monkey should own the copyright to the resulting viral photos. However, the courts consistently rejected this claim, with the Supreme Court also upholding the ruling that non-human entities, including animals, cannot hold copyrights.
If neither the photographer nor the monkey could claim copyright, the photos would have fallen into the public domain. Wikimedia published the monkey selfie photos, claiming they were in a public domain.
The case has broader implications, particularly in the digital age where AI-generated content is increasingly common. The ruling reinforces that non-human entities do not currently have copyright ownership under U.S. law, and it has influenced discussions on the copyrightability of AI-created works.
The photographer, David Slater, claimed that the prolonged legal battle left him so broke he could not even pay his income tax. Despite the financial hardship, the legal precedent remains that copyright ownership is limited to human authors and does not extend to animals or other non-human creators.
The legal side of AI-generated content is another area of interest. The terms of use and the ownership of content created by AI services are being closely examined. Platforms like Facebook, Messenger, Twitter, Pinterest, LinkedIn, Whatsapp, and Email are potential venues for AI-generated content to appear.
In conclusion, the monkey selfie copyright case has set a significant legal precedent in the U.S., establishing that non-human entities cannot own copyrights. This ruling has implications for the copyrightability of AI-created works and continues to shape the digital content landscape.
The ruling in the Naruto v. Slater case, where a monkey could not claim copyright ownership over photos it took, has relevant implications in the digital age. Particularly, it questions the copyrightability of AI-generated content on social media platforms like Facebook, Twitter, Pinterest, LinkedIn, Whatsapp, and Email, which may host such content. The entertainment value of such AI-generated content is not under question, but its copyright ownership still remains Undecided.
