Photography Copyright for Designs and Patents Act- myassignmenthelp

Question: Discuss about thePhotography Copyright for Designs and Patents Act. Answer: Copyrights in photography In the artist world, photography is a genre in the art that is very popular in terms of origination and distribution speed. Mainly, the reason behind its popularity is the creation of photographs in the sense that one just requires a camera to capture a photo. Distribution speed has been enhanced by the internet in that when photographs get to the internet they can spread like wildfire depending on how they appeal to the viewers or how they are perceived to mean. When this stage is reached, the question of who actually owns the photography comes in in relation to the copyrights in the photography world. This paper seeks to look into the matter of right ownership, personal view and support. The arguments will be done in relation to the British photographer David Slaters case. According toUK Copyright Designs and Patents Act 1988, the copyright owner is the person who created it. However, the argument is on whether Slater created the photography, which has been argued against, or whether the monkeys created them (Dodgson 2017). Other aspects that could be affecting the case is the intention of use for example as argued in the case of perfect 10 vs Google, it was argued that infringement cannot be sustained in place of distribution of knowledge to the many who access google. The other aspect of the argument is on which form the selfies have been used, whether in the original form or whether altered and the extent of the alteration if any. According to Murabayashi (2017), iin the case of Nussenzweig v DiCorcia, the extent to which the alteration has been done has separated the new photography from the original ones. In this case, the original photos were used. I would take the side of Slater being awarded the copyright since he is the one who acted in a way that enhanced the capturing of these photos. Animals are not classified as human and according to the copyrights law, only human being can own copyrights (Guadamuz 2016). The argument of monkeys owning this copyright is therefore void. A leaf can also be borrowed from the computer-generated works copyrights in which, the copyright owner is the person who enhances through an arrangement the derivation of the outcome which in most cases is the creator of the programme. In the case of Google, the infringement can be suppressed for the interest of the many. Denying slater this right can lead to the discouragement of experimenting and also lead to denial of knowledge which can be caused by the owners hiding their work from the public. In this sense, slater should be compensated for his efforts to take risks of experimenting and also encouraged to release his experimental outcome for the good of the whole public knowledge. In conclusion, PETA has no case since, even if the monkeys took the selfies that did not change them to human beings or at least did not change their classification (PETA 2017). Animals do not own copyrights and should, therefore, be out of the picture in this argument. The photos had been used in their original form which means Wikimedia had used someones work as their own which is wrong. The only defense Wikimedia can rely on is that they used the photos for the public knowledge purpose as the case of perfect 10 vs google. Bibliography Dodgson, L. (2017). A photographer's life, livelihood, and bank account are in tatters because a monkey took a selfie with his camera and is suing him for it. Available at: https://uk.businessinsider.com/david-slater-the-photographer-in-the-monkey-selfie-court-case-is-broke-2017-7 (Accessed 17 August 2017) Guadamuz, A. (2016) the monkey selfie: copyright lessons for originality in photographs and internet jurisdiction, Internet Policy Review, 5(1). doi: 10.14763/2016.1.398. PETA (2017) PETA appeals monkey selfie case on grounds that monkey owns copyright. Available at: https://www.peta.org/blog/peta-appeal-monkey-selfie-case-grounds-monkey-owns-copyright/ (Accessed: 28 August 2017). MURABAYASHI, A, (2017) 8 Legal Cases Every Photographer Should Know. Available at: https://petapixel.com/2014/10/28/8-legal-cases-every-photographer-know/(Accessed: 15 March 2018)