December 07, 2016, 11:40:07 AM

Author Topic: Who owns the photo?  (Read 23200 times)

Orangutan

  • 1D X Mark II
  • *******
  • Posts: 1565
Re: Who owns the photo?
« Reply #75 on: August 12, 2014, 12:37:28 PM »
Quote from: dilbert link=topic=22140.msg423920#msg423920 date

If an apple falls out of the tree and causes your camera to take a photo that is remarkably good, do you own the copyright? Of course if you lie, chances are nobody will know...
One must appreciate the gravity of the situation......

Yes, and reflect on the astronomical importance of this discussion.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Who owns the photo?
« Reply #75 on: August 12, 2014, 12:37:28 PM »

Orangutan

  • 1D X Mark II
  • *******
  • Posts: 1565
Re: Who owns the photo?
« Reply #76 on: August 12, 2014, 12:42:11 PM »
If it is a tripwire shot, then how can the photographer own the copyright if the composition included material that wasn't there when the photographer framed it?

This goes back to an another post where an instructor tells everyone how to frame a subject in order to take a photograph. In that instance you would be arguing that the instructor owns the copyright because the instructor decided what the composition was which is clearly incorrect.

If a random stroke of lightning automatically sets off the camera to take a picture that happens to include lightning that wasn't there when the image was framed then how can the photographer claim that it was their composition of the lightning that created the image?

This has been addressed elsewhere in the thread, please re-read it. 

Tugela

  • 5D Mark III
  • ******
  • Posts: 688
Re: Who owns the photo?
« Reply #77 on: August 12, 2014, 01:03:44 PM »
In the absence of an actual photographer, copyright should belong to the person who owns the equipment.

It is the same principle as a remote camera. There is no physical human operator directing or framing footage, but the footage still belongs to the person who owned the camera.

It is not rocket science. This guy has been ripped off shamelessly, and people are trying to hide behind what they see as a loophole in the law.

Orangutan

  • 1D X Mark II
  • *******
  • Posts: 1565
Re: Who owns the photo?
« Reply #78 on: August 12, 2014, 01:25:01 PM »
In the absence of an actual photographer, copyright should belong to the person who owns the equipment.

It is the same principle as a remote camera. There is no physical human operator directing or framing footage, but the footage still belongs to the person who owned the camera.

It is not rocket science. This guy has been ripped off shamelessly, and people are trying to hide behind what they see as a loophole in the law.

Imagine that, instead of macaques, it's members of an isolated Amazonian tribe who have no experience with technology.  Now who owns the "selfie" and why?

serendipidy

  • 1D X Mark II
  • *******
  • Posts: 1606
Re: Who owns the photo?
« Reply #79 on: August 12, 2014, 01:53:57 PM »
In the absence of an actual photographer, copyright should belong to the person who owns the equipment.

It is the same principle as a remote camera. There is no physical human operator directing or framing footage, but the footage still belongs to the person who owned the camera.

It is not rocket science. This guy has been ripped off shamelessly, and people are trying to hide behind what they see as a loophole in the law.

After careful review and reflection, in my opinion (which is never wrong), I think you are absolutely correct. I don't know why they don't come to some agreement to compensate Mr. Slater and put an end to all this monkey business. :)
« Last Edit: August 12, 2014, 01:55:48 PM by serendipidy »
EOS 5D miii, EOS 7D, 70-200mm f/2.8L IS ii, 100-400mmL IS

scyrene

  • 1D X Mark II
  • *******
  • Posts: 1509
    • My Flickr feed
Re: Who owns the photo?
« Reply #80 on: August 12, 2014, 02:18:59 PM »
In the absence of an actual photographer, copyright should belong to the person who owns the equipment.

It is the same principle as a remote camera. There is no physical human operator directing or framing footage, but the footage still belongs to the person who owned the camera.

It is not rocket science. This guy has been ripped off shamelessly, and people are trying to hide behind what they see as a loophole in the law.

Imagine that, instead of macaques, it's members of an isolated Amazonian tribe who have no experience with technology.  Now who owns the "selfie" and why?

Without coming to a conclusion on the original subject, only humans are considered people in law as far as I know (in most jurisdictions, right?). So these other cases aren't strictly equivalent. An animal cannot own property, intellectual or otherwise. It cannot sign a contract, nor can it commit a crime. Only humans can.
Current equipment: 5Ds, 5D mark III, 50D, 24-105L, MP-E, 70-200 f/2.8L II, 100L macro, 500L IS II; 1.4xIII + 2x III extenders; 600EX-RT.
Former equipment includes: 300D; EOS-M, EF-M 18-55, Samyang 14mm f/2.8, EF 35 f/2 IS, 70-200L f/4 non-IS, 85L II, Sigma 180 macro, 200L 2.8, 400L 5.6

Orangutan

  • 1D X Mark II
  • *******
  • Posts: 1565
Re: Who owns the photo?
« Reply #81 on: August 12, 2014, 02:52:46 PM »
Imagine that, instead of macaques, it's members of an isolated Amazonian tribe who have no experience with technology.  Now who owns the "selfie" and why?

Without coming to a conclusion on the original subject, only humans are considered people in law as far as I know (in most jurisdictions, right?). So these other cases aren't strictly equivalent. An animal cannot own property, intellectual or otherwise. It cannot sign a contract, nor can it commit a crime. Only humans can.

The question of whether an animal can own property is irrelevant.  Copyright is about what the artist does, not what others do.  Is there any difference in the actions of photographer in the two hypothetical cases?  Answer: no, the photographer's actions are the same.  Therefore, if the photographer's actions would not earn him copyright in the case of isolated tribespeople, the same is true for the macaques.

There is a faulty (I believe) assumption that every photo is entitled to copyright, and the only question is who gets it.  Several here have implied that copyright should be assigned to the human who has the most to do with the photo (by some vague definition).   This, I believe, is false: there is a minimum bar of action that's needed for a photographer to earn copyright over a photo.  To my mind that minimum bar is framing the shot.  Slater did not frame these shots, so he did not earn copyright.  It does not matter who or what might be the subject of the shot, or who else is involved in the shot.  If he didn't do that simple act then he doesn't get copyright.  The question of whether some other person or entity might be entitled to copyright is entirely separate.  It's entirely possible that there is no copyright on these photos at all.

It will be interesting to see if/how this is resolved by an Indonesian court.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Who owns the photo?
« Reply #81 on: August 12, 2014, 02:52:46 PM »

scyrene

  • 1D X Mark II
  • *******
  • Posts: 1509
    • My Flickr feed
Re: Who owns the photo?
« Reply #82 on: August 12, 2014, 03:32:45 PM »
In the absence of an actual photographer, copyright should belong to the person who owns the equipment.

It is the same principle as a remote camera. There is no physical human operator directing or framing footage, but the footage still belongs to the person who owned the camera.

It is not rocket science. This guy has been ripped off shamelessly, and people are trying to hide behind what they see as a loophole in the law.

Imagine that, instead of macaques, it's members of an isolated Amazonian tribe who have no experience with technology.  Now who owns the "selfie" and why?

Without coming to a conclusion on the original subject, only humans are considered people in law as far as I know (in most jurisdictions, right?). So these other cases aren't strictly equivalent. An animal cannot own property, intellectual or otherwise. It cannot sign a contract, nor can it commit a crime. Only humans can.

So if it isn't a person that sets the shutter or activates the shutter then the image has no copyright owner!

Not sure! I'm really addressing those people who have said it's somehow the monkey who should own it, or the people who own the park or whatever, which is patently ridiculous (the latter might be the case if they'd specifically stated it as terms of entry, as some zoos do).

Does copyright always apply to a photograph? Interesting question, I'd not considered it. I do worry that if we establish the principle that companies can come along and use your work because they don't think you had enough involvement in its creation, we're setting a dangerous precedent, however. There are already enough people prepared to steal stuff.
Current equipment: 5Ds, 5D mark III, 50D, 24-105L, MP-E, 70-200 f/2.8L II, 100L macro, 500L IS II; 1.4xIII + 2x III extenders; 600EX-RT.
Former equipment includes: 300D; EOS-M, EF-M 18-55, Samyang 14mm f/2.8, EF 35 f/2 IS, 70-200L f/4 non-IS, 85L II, Sigma 180 macro, 200L 2.8, 400L 5.6

AcutancePhotography

  • 1D X Mark II
  • *******
  • Posts: 1804
Re: Who owns the photo?
« Reply #83 on: August 13, 2014, 09:17:26 AM »
So if it isn't a person that sets the shutter or activates the shutter then the image has no copyright owner!

Under US law that perhaps that would be considered an "an Anonymous Work"

Title 17 USC Section 101

"An “anonymous work” is a work on the copies or phonorecords of which no natural person is identified as author."  I would interprete that as a monkey ain't no natural person. 8)

The problem is that copyright law is rather sparce on what are the restrictions of the use of an "anonymous work". 
I shoot with a Camera Obscura with an optical device attached that refracts and transmits light

dallasdave

  • Power Shot G7X
  • **
  • Posts: 11
Re: Who owns the photo?
« Reply #84 on: August 13, 2014, 09:48:07 AM »
I'll go with possession is nine-tenths of the law - he owns the camera so he owns the image.

Of course I also think if someone borrows your camera and takes a picture (for example if you are on vacation and you ask a stranger to take your picture), you own it.

Orangutan

  • 1D X Mark II
  • *******
  • Posts: 1565
Re: Who owns the photo?
« Reply #85 on: August 13, 2014, 10:01:59 AM »
I'll go with possession is nine-tenths of the law
It turns out that's not true (at least in the U.S.)  You may want to talk to a lawyer about that before you get yourself in trouble.

Quote
Of course I also think if someone borrows your camera and takes a picture (for example if you are on vacation and you ask a stranger to take your picture), you own it.
I believe this is a grey area of law, see the recent athlete/fan selfie stories.

As always, do not take legal advice from anyone on the Internet unless you know for a fact the person is a lawyer with expertise in that particular field.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Who owns the photo?
« Reply #85 on: August 13, 2014, 10:01:59 AM »