Wow. That's an awesomely obscure Toy Story reference.
Only obscure if you've not watched the movie over and over and over. It's right from the opening!
To this day I still say "Money money money" in exactly this voice, almost any time I see money, count money, notice any payment into my bank account, or otherwise receive money of any amount.
Ah, I see. Well, the fact is that many, many, many photographers have used animals to trigger photographs of the same animals. It's a very well established form of photography, as evidenced by a quick google image search of wildlife photography traps. The only story here is the ignorance of wikipedia editors, not the status of copyright.
I dunno, it seems to me as though intent on the part of the animal might be relevant. I mean, probably not under any current law, but philosophically? Morally? Probably.
The animal had no intent. None. The animal has no conception of pressing buttons leading to images recorded to memory.
Humans are animals and don't understand what button pressing means either or understand the concept of images recorded to memory.
Having worked in a Zoo I have seen an Orangutan understand the concept of a key and lock, how to use the key to unlock it's own cage from the inside.
I have also seen a Chimpanzee understand what a barrel of a rifle meant and have our intended target pretend to be an easy shot as we were flanked at the fence of the enclosure and have the barrel bent back in our faces.
I agree the monkey in this situation is just messing around with a motion sensor photo trap, far too many people decide on the side of intelligent design or evolution without ever encountering how smart these "animals" are.
No, the monkey wasn't setting off a trap. It was pressing the button to take a photo. But that isn't the point. The person pressing the button isn't automatically the copyright holder, even if you want to call a monkey a person (via anything to do with intent).
This issue came up with the selfie at the Oscars this year too. Who owns the photo? Ellen didn't actually press the button, but she set up the situation, owned the camera, etc, etc. Bradley Cooper would be considered an assistant in that situation, not the photographer, even though he is in the image too. Same with this monkey.
The photographer had the intent to capture the photo. They were lucky that a monkey played along. The monkey could be considered, at most, an assistant.
No, the photographer did not have the intent to capture "the" photo; he had the intent to capture "a" photo (or several), but the circumstances went entirely outside of his control.
But this happens all the time. The only reason this photo is even being questioned compared to every other animal-accidentally-taking-a-photo photo, or even those where it is intentional (on the part of the photographer) for the subject to accidentally take a photo of itself, is that in this case the subject is grinning at the lens and has opposable thumbs. The whole reaction is pathetic.
Comments
Not pictured - Jughead breaking down over a zombified Hot-dog.
I used spritesheets in a clever way today.
Crimsons
Oresama Teacher
Nononono
Gou-Dere Bishoujo Nagihara Sora
Gokukoku no Brynhildr
Lucifer and the Biscuit Hammer
Rookies
Ganota no Onna
Special Martial Arts Extreme Hell Private High School
To this day I still say "Money money money" in exactly this voice, almost any time I see money, count money, notice any payment into my bank account, or otherwise receive money of any amount.
Please Love the Useless Me
Donyatsu
Having worked in a Zoo I have seen an Orangutan understand the concept of a key and lock, how to use the key to unlock it's own cage from the inside.
I have also seen a Chimpanzee understand what a barrel of a rifle meant and have our intended target pretend to be an easy shot as we were flanked at the fence of the enclosure and have the barrel bent back in our faces.
I agree the monkey in this situation is just messing around with a motion sensor photo trap, far too many people decide on the side of intelligent design or evolution without ever encountering how smart these "animals" are.
This issue came up with the selfie at the Oscars this year too. Who owns the photo? Ellen didn't actually press the button, but she set up the situation, owned the camera, etc, etc. Bradley Cooper would be considered an assistant in that situation, not the photographer, even though he is in the image too. Same with this monkey.
The photographer had the intent to capture the photo. They were lucky that a monkey played along. The monkey could be considered, at most, an assistant.