Quoting from the BB article which itself quotes the US copyright law: "Works produced by mechanical processes or random selection without any contribution by a

Quoting from the BB article which itself quotes the US copyright law: "Works produced by mechanical processes or random selection without any contribution by a human author are not registrable. Thus, a linoleum floor covering featuring a multicolored pebble design which was produced by a mechanical process in unrepeatable, random patterns, is not registrable. Similarly, a work owing its form to the forces of nature and lacking human authorship is not registrable; thus, for example, a piece of driftwood even if polished and mounted is not registrable" So if you purposely setup the Roomba to knock over the paint and produce art, then yes my understanding is that is copyrightable. But if the Roomba accidentally knocked it over, then it's not - based that there was no purposable (is that a word?) human contribution to create the art. Similarly, if the photographer had handed the monkey the camera with the intention of getting the monkey to take a photo, then it's copyrightable. If the monkey picked up the camera because the photographer wasn't keeping a close eye on his equipment, then the subsequent photo isn't copyrightable. My understanding of copyright is that 'intent' plays a part in the decision.