Under the agreement, the photographer whose camera was used to take the photos agreed to donate 25% of future earnings from the images to charities dedicated to the protection of crested macaques in Indonesia.
Lawyers have announced a settlement in a lawsuit over who owns the copyright of photographs taken by a monkey before a federal appeals court could respond to the new legal question.
According to the agreement, the photographer whose camera was used to take the photos agreed to donate 25% of future earnings from the images to charities dedicated to protecting monkeys in Indonesia, lawyers from a rights group animals.
The group’s attorneys and photographer, David Slater, petitioned the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. A circuit of San Francisco to dismiss the case and reject a decision of a court that says that the animals can not own copyrights.
Andrew J. Dhuey, Mr. Slater’s lawyer, declined to comment on how much money the photos generated or whether Mr. Slater would keep the remaining 75% of future income.
There was no immediate failure of the ninth circuit. People for the ethical treatment of animals used on behalf of the ape monkey in 2015, seeking financial control of the photographs for the benefit of the monkey named Naruto who broke the photos with Mr. Slater’s camera.
“PETA and David Slater agree that this case raises important and cutting-edge issues about expanding the legal rights of nonhuman animals, a goal they both support and will continue their respective work to achieve this goal,” said Slater. PETA said in a joint statement.
Mr. Slater’s lawyers argued that his company, Wildlife Personalities Ltd., has worldwide commercial rights to the photos, including a famous desktop publishing of the teeth grin.
The photos were taken during a 2011 trip to Sulawesi, Indonesia, with an unattended camera owned by Mr. Slater.
Federal Judge William Orrick said in a ruling in favor of Mr. Slater last year that “while Congress and the President can extend the protection of the law to animals as well as to humans, there are no indications that to do in the Copyright Law. “The 9th Circuit was considering PETA’s appeal.
Lawyers notified the appellate court on Aug. 4 that they were approaching an agreement and asked the judges not to rule. A panel of three judges from the 9th Circuit heard oral arguments in the case in July.
