2 ms·

"The market" is not a criterion for copyright; in fact it has nothing to do with copyright at all. Some things are marketable and cannot be copyrighted, some th

"The market" is not a criterion for copyright; in fact it has nothing to do with copyright at all. Some things are marketable and cannot be copyrighted, some things can be copyrighted and are not marketable at all The photographer did not set out to get monkeys to push the trigger on the camera; the final situation that set in motion the creation of the work was not put forth by himself and is a complete accident. There was a case of a bird stealing a camera and flying with it; it was considered to be in the public domain. It's unlikely that a ruling on this would show anything different.

logfromblammo 12y ago
Marketability is not at issue. That just means that no one wants to own something more than the person that already has it. It is entirely possible to own something that literally no one else in the universe wants. There is no marketability, but there is still ownership. There is always the possibility that someone might change preferences and offer a trade. The photographer did not push the image capture button. But the macaque didn't accidentally post-process the best images and sell them for publication, either. The human did all the work necessary to make the image valuable to other humans. If the macaque painted a masterwork with oils on canvas, and left it in the jungle, the human that finds it owns it, and the copyright for it. In the same vein, the person who finds a piece of driftwood with an uncanny resemblance to Cthulhu owns it. It does not matter if it was constructed or found. The value lies in separating what is appealing to other humans from what is not. Suppose that J.D. Salinger wrote a book and kept it locked in a vault, with orders that it be burned on his death. A thief sneaks in, cracks the lock, copies the manuscript, and publishes it under his own name. He owns the copyright. I guess J.D. should have shared his creation with other humans by publishing. Like patent, the monopoly privilege of copyright is predicated on bringing the product to the marketplace, even if no one wants to buy or no one can raise the sale price.

logfromblammo 12y ago

Marketability is not at issue. That just means that no one wants to own something more than the person that already has it. It is entirely possible to own something that literally no one else in the universe wants. There is no marketability, but there is still ownership. There is always the possibility that someone might change preferences and offer a trade. The photographer did not push the image capture button. But the macaque didn't accidentally post-process the best images and sell them for publication, either. The human did all the work necessary to make the image valuable to other humans. If the macaque painted a masterwork with oils on canvas, and left it in the jungle, the human that finds it owns it, and the copyright for it. In the same vein, the person who finds a piece of driftwood with an uncanny resemblance to Cthulhu owns it. It does not matter if it was constructed or found. The value lies in separating what is appealing to other humans from what is not. Suppose that J.D. Salinger wrote a book and kept it locked in a vault, with orders that it be burned on his death. A thief sneaks in, cracks the lock, copies the manuscript, and publishes it under his own name. He owns the copyright. I guess J.D. should have shared his creation with other humans by publishing. Like patent, the monopoly privilege of copyright is predicated on bringing the product to the marketplace, even if no one wants to buy or no one can raise the sale price.