PETA At It Again

H

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
PETA is suing to give copyright for 'monkey selfies' to the monkey instead of the photographer.

A macaque monkey who took now-famous selfie photographs should be declared the copyright owner of the photos, rather than the nature photographer who positioned the camera, animal-rights activists contend in a novel lawsuit filed Tuesday.
 
............................................________........................
....................................,.-‘”...................``~.,..................
.............................,.-”...................................“-.,............
.........................,/...............................................”:,........
.....................,?......................................................\,.....
.................../...........................................................,}....
................./......................................................,:`^`..}....
.............../...................................................,:”........./.....
..............?.....__.........................................:`.........../.....
............./__.(.....“~-,_..............................,:`........../........
.........../(_....”~,_........“~,_....................,:`........_/...........
..........{.._$;_......”=,_.......“-,_.......,.-~-,},.~”;/....}...........
...........((.....*~_.......”=-._......“;,,./`..../”............../............
...,,,___.\`~,......“~.,....................`.....}............../.............
............(....`=-,,.......`........................(......;_,,-”...............
............/.`~,......`-...............................\....../\...................
.............\`~.*-,.....................................|,./.....\,__...........
,,_..........}.>-._\...................................|..............`=~-,....
.....`=~-,_\_......`\,.................................\........................
...................`=~-,,.\,...............................\.......................
................................`:,,...........................`\..............__..
.....................................`=-,...................,%`>--==``.......
........................................_\..........._,-%.......`\...............
...................................,<`.._|_,-&``................`\..............
 
PETA, like the EPA, could be a force for good if they quit doing so much utterly stupid and idiotic things all the time.

Sadly, this doesn't even register on the scale for stupid shit pulled by PETA since they're borderline eco-terrorists or whatever you want to call them. They do some appalling shit.
 
Steve said:
A macaque monkey who took now-famous selfie photographs should be declared the copyright owner of the photos, rather than the nature photographer who positioned the camera, animal-rights activists contend in a novel lawsuit filed Tuesday.[/I]
Click to expand...

Is the Monkey is going to pay taxes on any earnings?
Does the Monkey have the rights to sign contracts?

Can the Monkey be arrested, put on trial and sent to jail for stealing items from tourists?
Can the Monkey be charged with assault for attacking another monkey?

With rights comes responsibility, something the Monkey is not capable of.

I'm sure PETA plans to volunteer to manage the copyrights and to collect any funds for the Monkey....
 
ytLLBqb.jpg
 
I'm having trouble coming up with a computing/technology angle to this story.
 
Pictures taken on Sulawesi, lawsuit filled in San Francisco.

How fast will the judge just throw it out ? i mean the judge doesn't even have to say anything like "Monkey =| human being and thus doesn't have copyrights" just "not the proper jurisdiction".
 
Money is a Human construct, they monkey couldn't give two shits... which given what monkey's are renowned for is pretty amazing.
 
Was hoping pretty, but ignorant and misguided, PETA girls were getting naked. I am disappointed.
 
OEM said:
PETA, like the EPA, could be a force for good if they quit doing so much utterly stupid and idiotic things all the time.

Sadly, this doesn't even register on the scale for stupid shit pulled by PETA since they're borderline eco-terrorists or whatever you want to call them. They do some appalling shit.
Click to expand...

PETA and the EPA both already do good things, but stupid things like this sure don't do anything to promote that public image in that regard. Sadly as with any large organization there's always some bad apples and nut cases. :-(
 
What's silly is the image this portrays... I love animals and I feel that pets and wild animals alike have certain rights, I don't approve of ANYONE hunting endangered species, and anyone who induces or prolongs an animal's pain is a criminal in my mind... but shit like this is ridiculous... and it gives people like me a REALLY bad piece of representation. Why can't PETA (not that great of a group, btw, I don't endorse them at all) just change their slogan to "Don't be a dick to animals" and be done with it? I think that is a more powerful message than trying shock tactics to get attention...
 
Steve said:
PETA is suing to give copyright for 'monkey selfies' to the monkey instead of the photographer.

A macaque monkey who took now-famous selfie photographs should be declared the copyright owner of the photos, rather than the nature photographer who positioned the camera, animal-rights activists contend in a novel lawsuit filed Tuesday.
Click to expand...

Peta is bad, but Wikimedia is worse. At least Peta is going through the legal system. Wikimedia has just said, "we don't recognize the copyright he has and we'll do as we please."
 
hey maybe they think they are monkeys in disguise... and they do not want the rest of normal people to have anything... grin. seriously what exactly is a monkey going to do with a copy right image unless people are training monkeys to take naughty pictures and leave the owner with the copy right...
 
Tweak42 said:
PETA and the EPA both already do good things, but stupid things like this sure don't do anything to promote that public image in that regard. Sadly as with any large organization there's always some bad apples and nut cases. :-(
Click to expand...
I thought peta just killed tons of animals and did stupid shit like this?
 
Tweak42 said:
PETA and the EPA both already do good things, but stupid things like this sure don't do anything to promote that public image in that regard. Sadly as with any large organization there's always some bad apples and nut cases. :-(
Click to expand...

What has peta done that's good? I'm genuinely curious. I've never heard of any good hings they've done. I know that doesn't mean much because people focus on the bad, but I've heard of ZIP of good that they've done.
 
See what it is, it's not so much that the monkey should have control over its own image.

It's that PETA would "generously" administer the copyrights (and any fees that come in) FOR the monkey.

So, in the end, it's all about money.

Fucking greedy cock-mongering ass clowns.
 
Will anyone PLEASE think of the monkeys?!

This is absurd. I feel as if they have to pull the occasional bullshit to stay relevant in the news.

I haven't heard about them before this in a LONG time.
 
I kinda agree with PETA, ownership of all Photographs should go to the subject...

Provided they have human rights. But otherwise I agree with them. Photographers are just hitting the button, it's not an art form to just capture what's there. It becomes art when you stage it.
 
Quix said:
I kinda agree with PETA, ownership of all Photographs should go to the subject...

Provided they have human rights. But otherwise I agree with them. Photographers are just hitting the button, it's not an art form to just capture what's there. It becomes art when you stage it.
Click to expand...

Which is more than the subject is often doing. (just being there)
 
OEM said:
PETA, like the EPA, could be a force for good if they quit doing so much utterly stupid and idiotic things all the time.

Sadly, this doesn't even register on the scale for stupid shit pulled by PETA since they're borderline eco-terrorists or whatever you want to call them. They do some appalling shit.
Click to expand...

Agreed.
 
PETA is wasting a lot of its time on a broad range of animals. I think it's a lot more important that they focus more exclusively on cats because cats are both cute and fuzzy.
 
pothb said:
What has peta done that's good? I'm genuinely curious. I've never heard of any good hings they've done. I know that doesn't mean much because people focus on the bad, but I've heard of ZIP of good that they've done.
Click to expand...

PETA have drawn attention to some of the truly inhumane ways livestock and food animals.

They're also responsible for improvements in the situation of performing animals. No more beating elephants with hooks and chains. And when someone wants to throw a goat out of a plane as a movie gag, they no longer use real goats.

The problem is, all the good they've done gets totally BURIED by all the idiotic media stunts. You see, the day-to-day of PETA isn't very glamorous. It's work, just like everything else out there. So the dumbasses at PETA keep trying to prolong their 15 minutes of fame through any means necessary. They're the media-whore grandparent of "Reality TV".
 
Well, that definitely reinforces my belief that there are no absolute good or bad in any group.
 
Chas said:
They're also responsible for improvements in the situation of performing animals. No more beating elephants with hooks and chains. And when someone wants to throw a goat out of a plane as a movie gag, they no longer use real goats.".
Click to expand...

The goat thing reminded me about the bogus "No animals were harmed in the making of this film" at the end of movies. It's actually a trademarked phrase and meaningless.

For example, over two dozen animals died of dehydration/exhaustion during a break in filming of LoTR, yet it still got to say that at the end.

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown...ere-harmed-movie-disclaimer-doesnt-mean-much/
 
Quix said:
I kinda agree with PETA, ownership of all Photographs should go to the subject...

Provided they have human rights. But otherwise I agree with them. Photographers are just hitting the button, it's not an art form to just capture what's there. It becomes art when you stage it.
Click to expand...

WUH? The subject NEVER owns the copyright, unless they paid for it. IOW, if you're Taylor Swift and I take your picture, I own the copyright.

Any monkey can push a button. Odds are you take completely ordinary and uninteresting pictures (because if you were worth a crap, you'd know that taking a good picture requires far more than pushing a button).
 
Quix said:
I kinda agree with PETA, ownership of all Photographs should go to the subject...

Provided they have human rights. But otherwise I agree with them. Photographers are just hitting the button, it's not an art form to just capture what's there. It becomes art when you stage it.
Click to expand...

It becomes art when you stage it?

So every picture ever taken by a photographer when they happened to be in a certain place at a certain time is no longer art because they had no control over staging what was happening in the picture?

Well there goes many of the most iconic and famous photographs of all time as art, in your opinion...
 
KazeoHin said:
What's silly is the image this portrays... I love animals and I feel that pets and wild animals alike have certain rights, I don't approve of ANYONE hunting endangered species, and anyone who induces or prolongs an animal's pain is a criminal in my mind... but shit like this is ridiculous... and it gives people like me a REALLY bad piece of representation. Why can't PETA (not that great of a group, btw, I don't endorse them at all) just change their slogan to "Don't be a dick to animals" and be done with it? I think that is a more powerful message than trying shock tactics to get attention...
Click to expand...

I don't think animals have rights at all. In fact i find it a rediculous concept.

That being said, I think Humans have a responsability to treat animals with a measure of self respect.

See, I square it this way. I have hunted deer. I have killed dear. I have eaten dear. For a dear to have rights sort of makes everything I have done in this regard criminal, yet there is nothing I have done that feels criminal or even a little wrong. It felt pretty natural as it goes.

But I did feel a responsability toward the animals I hunted. I should make sure I have a good shot, a good chance to take the animal down and not just cripple him to run off and die, wasted. I felt a responsability to do my best to not see the animal suffer needlessly. Yes of course shooting the animal is going to cause him great pain. But I should not act as if it doesn't matter that the animal is in pain, I should finish him quickly ending needless suffering.

I should not waste the animal's gifts. I should leave him to rot, killing just to kill, or killing only for a trophy. I should do all I can to make sure the animal's life is taken and used properly so that there is a reason the animal was killed that fits within the rules of nature.

The animal doesn't have rights, but I have responsabilities.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top