Monkey selfie again

[Username3]

That is so depressing. At that Wikimania in the UK Wales and a load of power users and WMF staff mugged for the camera with Slater's photo. This is unconscionable.

And here is the PETA lawyer's argument: http://www.alternet.org/environment/yes ... lfie-video

See the grilling of Peta's lawyer at 8:00+ mins
Also effective arguments by Angela Dunning, attorney for Blurb

"Dhuey didn't pull any punches in his reply.

"How can PETA, having alleged no relationship with Naruto, be a suitable 'next friend' for him when PETA’s relationship with the primatologist who does allege a lifelong relationship with him has soured to the point that PETA’s general counsel had her arrested for criminal trespass and harassment?" he writes, adding that it's PETA's burden to show it is a suitable next friend despite the animosity, not Slater's to prove it isn't fit."

source: http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/thr-es ... rt-1020220

[badmachine]

It seems Slater has settled with PETA.

Under a compromise, Mr Slater agreed to donate 25 per cent of any future revenue from the images to charities dedicated to protecting crested macaques in Indonesia.

[suckadmin]

I wonder why PETA isn't suing over these videos?

[ericbarbour]

Easy---no Wikipedian "cult member" wants to steal that content and put it on Commons under an open license. See the term "Flickrwashing".

[ericbarbour]

The case refuses to die, mostly because the idiots of PETA will not give it up

https://www.theverge.com/2018/4/13/1723 ... iss-denied

[Mutineer]

The case refuses to die, mostly because the idiots of PETA will not give it up

https://www.theverge.com/2018/4/13/1723 ... iss-denied

No, no, you're reading it wrong. "PETA and the photographer settled last year, but the Ninth Circuit will be issuing a ruling anyway." That means the Ninth Circuit court wants to issue a ruling.

And the Ninth Circuit and PETA are not the villains here. The villain is the WMF.

[ericbarbour]

The case refuses to die, mostly because the idiots of PETA will not give it up

https://www.theverge.com/2018/4/13/1723 ... iss-denied

No, no, you're reading it wrong. "PETA and the photographer settled last year, but the Ninth Circuit will be issuing a ruling anyway." That means the Ninth Circuit court wants to issue a ruling.

Kind of unclear from that article. It's very rare for a federal court to issue a ruling AFTER settlement. There's something deeply crazy going on here.

And the Ninth Circuit and PETA are not the villains here. The villain is the WMF.

You know it and I know it, but the Ninth Circuit and the rest of the world probably never will. Wikimedia continues to avoid having their clock cleaned in a courtroom.

[CrowsNest]

Seems to me that the court does want the chance to make a definitive ruling on whether or not a monkey can be a party to a legal case.

Doesn't really affect the WMF either way, they will only get their clock cleaned when someone challenges the copyright status of this particular photograph with respect to the USCO's guidance in a US court, specifically what it means to "create" a photograph. The only way the WMF doesn't get fucked in that scenario, is if a judge rules that "create" literally means pressing the shutter. Anything else, and Slater will be entitled to the shirt off Jimmy's back, and from every last Wikipediot who infringed his rights. The question is, who is going to fund it all? Nobody it seems.

The Wikipedia article on this is still unsurprisingly shit - not once but twice it has huge paragraphs being duplicated. They can't write for shit, the first hint of complexity, their model collapses.

More importantly, it contains this blatant lie, the product of some Wikipediot's wishful thinking.......

On 21 August 2014 the United States Copyright Office ruled that the picture can’t be copyrighted

Try and delete it, and some shrieker will revert and probably accuse you of vandalism for good measure.

It's not much consolation, but it does at least make it very clear that whatever the legal arguments, the WMF and the Wikiepdiots absolutely, totally, violated their principle of doing no harm. Why? Because they cannot abide anyone making money from stuff they think is free. And they're happy for the burden of proof on that freeness to fall elsewhere, in violation of their other principes, namely to be cautious and don't make shit up.

[Graaf Statler]

It's the philosophy of there sekt. Look what happens here. (Dutch) This user got a letter of a Dutch lawyer, he had to remove content what is protected under the Dutch law. He had to remove the copyvio and that is fair. Because that lawyer can also send him direct a bill in our legel system. One screenshot will do.
What is the reaction? They block him when he start to do so! (Magere Hein, Multichill, perm)

But the story is't finished jet, they offer him help from WMF Legal. In Holland where he had broken the Dutch copyright law! And are wondering why he didn't accept this "help" form uncle WMF, and had himself what was asked removed with a IP.
How stupide can someone be, because who ends up in a Dutch court? Alexwheely! And who has to pay at the end? WMF? Wikimedia-NL? Magere Hein? Multichili? No, mister Alexwheely himself who was blocked.

And this is interesting:

Voor zover ik weet is mij alleen gezegd dat de juridische afdeling er naar zou kijken. Als ik concrete hulp had kunnen krijgen had ik die toch echt met beide handen aangepakt ?Alexwheely (overleg) 14 mrt 2018 09:19 (CET)

They didn't offer him legal help at all, they offer him to have a look at the case!. American lawyers! What is of course a huge risk, because in that time that Dutch lawyer can send him a huge bill, he had to pay. It is Holland with it's strikt copyright law, not Amerika, and he is Dutch.

And that is the "help" you get offered, because WFM can't do anything for you. Why? Because if I drive drunk in Holland, what can a American lawyer do for me? Nothing! Because I have broken the DUTCH law in Holland! By the way, neither a Dutch lawyer can do much for you in this case, you simple have to pay and/or lose your driver license. Because that is pretty normal if you break the law somewhere, not only in Holland

[CrowsNest]

A sad reminder of the riches and recognition the Wikipediots probably denied Slater, all because when push came to shove, they chose to ape the behaviour of evil corporations and exploit the ambiguity of the law and expense of the legal system in their favour.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/in-pictures-43713499

Fancy that, an evil corporation whose sole income stream is conning gullible fools it is a force for good. Nice work if you can get it.