Slater has been fighting for copyright for a photo for years, and he could not afford a plane ticket to San Francisco to attend the most recent court hearing held on Wednesday, but has been monitoring the whole event from home via the Internet, reports The Guardian.
In addition, he says that he does not have enough money to replace broken photographic equipment, nor to pay a lawyer representing him since the process began in 2015.
The story of photography began in 2011 when Slater was in Indonesia and photographed a group of monkeys. He claims that the photos were due to his ingenuity to make the monkeys push the shutter button while they were looking directly into the lens.
"It's not an accidental behavior of the ape. It required a lot of knowledge on my part, a lot of perseverance, sweat and pain," said Slater, according to the Guardian.
The photo became very popular and earned several thousand pounds to cover the cost of the trip to Indonesia, but in 2014 it became the subject of a copyright dispute, after Slater asked the "Tehdert" and "Wikipedia" sites to stop using his photos without permission.
The sites refused, saying that the photo could not have copyright because the monkey is an original image creator.
The US Copyright Office has ruled that copyright can not belong to animals.
In the year 2015, PETA filed a lawsuit claiming that copyrights belonged to animals and identified the apes as six-year-old males, Naruto.
In 2016, the court ruled against PETE, saying animals could not be copyright owners.
However, the PETA filed an appeal on the basis of which a hearing was held on Wednesday. Among the controversial issues being discussed is whether PETA has a close enough relationship with Naruto to represent it in court, then whether it is worth sending a written copyright notice to the community of snacks, and whether Naruto was harmed by not being recognized as the owner copyrights.
Judge Randy Smith said that in this case there is no way to gain or retain money, nor lose the reputation.
"There is not even a claim that copyright could somehow use Naruto. What financial benefits to apply to him. There is nothing," said Judge Smith.
The second judge, Carlos Bea, at one point considered the issue of transferring copyright to the offspring of the author.
"In Naruto's world, is there legitimacy and illegitimacy? Are Naruto's descendants" children "in the way that the court defines them?" Judge Bea asked.
For Slater, it was a painfully irrational series of questions in the light of his concern for his seven-year-old daughter and the belief that his rights belonged to him.
"I know for sure that the monkey is a photo of a woman and that they have been wrong for years. I am deluded by the American judiciary. It is essential that the real monkey is suing me," said Slater.
Because of all the processes on the brink of bankruptcy, he is considering what he could do to earn, because, according to him, now there is not enough to pay the income tax.
"I'm trying to become a tennis coach, I'm thinking even about walking the dogs, I'm not making enough or paying income tax, I'm on the verge of burning everything," Slater told Guardian.
0 comments:
Post a Comment