Morons of the Internet: PETA (04/10/15)

This is the segment where I scour my favorite forums around the internet and find some particularly interesting articles about current affairs told in the words of my favorite human beings.

In this edition we have a ridiculous lawsuit from those resident morons over at PETA. Instead of targeting huge problems that face animals they have decided to sue a single photographer over a 'monkey selfie'. This idiocy, ladies and gentleman, is what your donations are funding.
___________________________________________________________________________________
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/sep/22/monkey-selfies-copyright-lawsuit-peta
http://www.mediapeta.com/peta/PDF/Complaint.pdf
http://www.copyrightcompendium.com/#202.02%28b%29
___________________________________________________________________________________

Below is genuinely the reason PETA give for suing a seemingly innocent wildlife photographer over an image taken on his own merit. Naruto by the way is the name of the monkey in question.

Yeah that's right, under PETA's logic a monkey that takes a photo out of curiosity should automatically have ownership of those photos despite not even knowing what copyright laws are. It's all very well saying that if a human were to have taken the pictures then they would be protected by copyright laws, but the fact is that Naruto is not a human; he's quite clearly a monkey. In that case PETA might as well have turned up to court and said 'well he would have murdered the person if the bullet had actually hit him'. You know this is going to be a pathetic argument when the whole thing hinges on a point that is entirely hypothetical and irrelevant considering that monkey's don't comprehend what copyright is. This bollocks is even before you get to the mountain of shit that PETA just pluck out of thin air. At no point do they ever mention that the camera was intentionally left in that location by the photographer in the hope that a 'monkey selfie' might be taken, and so as far as anyone is concerned surely the rights of the photo must go to the photographer as he's the one who deserves the credit.

PETA then go on to make another false statement; this time trying to redefine 'authorship'. Looking at article '202.02b' of the US Copyright Office's Compendium you will find that the term 'authorship' is defined as follows: "for a work to be copyrightable, it must owe its origin to a human being. Materials produced solely by nature, by plants, or by animals are not copyrightable." Where do we draw the line with your bullshit PETA? Does this mean the rights to a feature film should now be given to the camera crew instead? Does this mean the lion in the MGM title sequence needs to be given the same preferential treatment as fellow actors? Should those whales in those bloody whale song CD's be given royalties for what is clearly their labour? This whole argument is ridiculous as PETA are clearly in denial that copyright laws are present to protect the artists themselves, and not monkeys who happen to click a button by accident. It's quite clear to me that PETA have taken this whole issue completely out of context, and if the reply from the court was anything other than 'fuck off' then there's something drastically wrong with American law.

PETA may think they're being clever in trying to find loopholes in the law to spread their cause, but in reality they're evidently being assholes to an innocent photographer who meant no harm. The photographer's photo actually helped raise awareness for the monkey in question, which perhaps PETA should spend more time doing instead of funding pointless bullshit like this; especially when the photographer in question was quoted as saying this:

Turns out that PETA are suing an average guy who isn't made of money and will now have to go through the whole costly case because PETA refuse to get their heads out of there own asses. What a dick move for any organisation to make, yet alone a charity that prides itself on supporting ethical behaviors. All this photographer wanted to do was share his passion with the world, maybe make a living off of it, but PETA being the narcissistic assholes that they are decide to ruin this man's career with their liberal bullshit, only so they can spurt their biased agenda down everyone's throats.










However the worst part of the story for me is that the photographer was trying to raise awareness for the critically endangered Sulawesi Crested Macaque, of which there are only around 5,000 left in the wild. By suing this photographer PETA are taking the focus off of the endangered monkey in question just so they can spread more awareness of their own unsustainable campaigns. If PETA are allowed to continue with this crap and get away with it then that's going to prevent wildlife photographers from doing their job, and that will have a huge effect on the amount of funds given to genuine conservation programmes, that unlike PETA's methods might actually help wild animals. PETA claim that they will give the money from this case to the primate community, but given their record in funding stupid projects to gain awareness and various unsustainable projects, it instantly becomes apparent that this lawsuit is going to have a detrimental effect on wild animal populations globally. All this in exchange for another pathetic PR stunt from PETA that only serves to give them even more money to waste.

I don't think even PETA can be moronic enough to think that monkeys have a basic understanding of what copyright laws are, yet they still won't admit that this sham is just another way to try and give animals the same undeserved rights as humans. It's a damn shame that this event has to happen as it takes the funding away from where it's needed at a time when it's most needed, and instead being given to some hypocritical charity that are only successful in slaughtering animals in their care. On this issue though I don't care that PETA are hypocritical morons, only that here they're a bunch of assholes. This idiocy is what your donations are funding people. Your donations are not spent saving animals, but instead to damage others who have different methods of preserving nature. What a pathetic charity. It's honestly like commenting on the actions of a petulant child.