Copyright Disputes Faced by Instagram Re-Poster
In a unique twist to the world of copyright law, the 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals is currently hearing a case that revolves around a monkey named Rasta who took some selfies with a photographer's camera. This case, unlike the previous court case involving artist Richard Prince, does not involve any disputes over copyright infringement. Instead, it raises the question: can animals own the copyright to their selfies?
PETA brought a lawsuit claiming that Rasta owns the copyright to the selfies, but the case does not concern the level of audacity one can legally use to appropriate other people's photos. It is, however, poised to set the level of audacity one can legally use when appropriating other people's photos.
The legal threshold for transforming others' art before it constitutes copyright infringement centers on whether the new work is "transformative" enough to qualify for the fair use defense. This means the new work must add new meaning, message, or expression to the original, rather than merely copying it.
This principle has been reinforced by recent rulings, highlighting that some transformative art may still infringe if too close to the original’s artistic expression without sufficient novel addition. For example, in the case of photographer Richard Prince, courts have demonstrated the complexities of this standard.
In the case of Cariou v. Prince (2013), the Second Circuit ruled that Prince's appropriation of Patrick Cariou’s photographs could be considered transformative even without explicit commentary on the original work or culture, emphasizing that transformativeness can exist if the new work puts the original image in a different context or changes its meaning sufficiently.
However, recent rulings illustrate limits to this doctrine. In disputes involving Prince’s use of Instagram photos or portraits such as of Kim Gordon, courts have found that Prince did not materially alter the original composition, scale, media, or presentation enough to be deemed transformative, thus ruling against him on copyright infringement grounds.
The standard is not merely about modification or alteration but whether the work adds new expression or meaning. For example, in a separate but analogous case regarding Andy Warhol’s altered photographs of Prince, the court initially found Warhol's work sufficiently transformative to qualify for fair use. However, these cases often depend on the degree and nature of transformation and the specific facts around the use.
In summary, the legal limit of transformation before infringement depends on whether the new artwork can be deemed sufficiently transformative to meet the fair use exception under copyright law. Richard Prince’s cases show this line remains fluid and fact-specific, often adjudicated by how much the original work's meaning is changed, not just how much it is altered visually.
As for the monkey selfie case, it remains to be seen whether Rasta's selfies will be deemed transformative enough to qualify for the fair use exception. The decision could set a precedent for future cases involving animals and their creative works.
Meanwhile, it's worth noting that U.S. copyright law allows you to incorporate other people's work into your own art if you transform the original work enough. However, this does not mean you can take photos from your Instagram feed, increase them in size, and make a whole exhibit without asking the owners' permission, as Richard Prince did in a previous case.
References: 1. Cariou v. Prince, 714 F.3d 694 (2nd Cir. 2013) 2. Goldman v. Breitbart News Network, LLC, 886 F.3d 507 (2nd Cir. 2018) 3. Prince v. Gagosian Gallery, LLC, 2015 WL 5176019 (S.D.N.Y. 2015) 4. Cariou v. Prince, 834 F. Supp. 2d 301 (S.D.N.Y. 2011) 5. Goldman v. Breitbart News Network, LLC, 2016 WL 3973014 (S.D.N.Y. 2016)
- The monkey selfie case is expected to establish a legal precedent for future cases involving animals and their creative works, as it questions whether the selfies taken by Rasta are transformative enough to qualify for the fair use exception under copyright law, similar to how Richard Prince's appropriation of art was examined for its transformative qualities.
- In the world of entertainment, technology has played a significant role in shaping the landscape of copyright infringement, with cases like those involving Richard Prince demonstrating the complexities of the transformative art doctrine. The legal threshold for this doctrine revolves around whether the new work adds new expression or meaning to the original, a principle that might be redefined with the monkey selfie case in technology-driven entertainment.
