Monkey Selfie Case Swings Back Into Action at Ninth Circuit
At least one judge wants the full court to reconsider its precedents on Article III standing for animals.
May 29, 2018 at 11:29 AM
2 minute read
The monkey selfie case is not quite over yet at the Ninth Circuit.
At least one member of the panel that decided the copyright case of Naruto the crested macaque last month is calling on the court to reconsider the decision en banc. Lawyers for People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, photographer David Slater and publisher Blurb were invited Friday to file briefs within three weeks.
The court didn't propose any specific reasons for going en banc, but it probably has little to do with copyright and a lot to do with Article III standing for animals.
Judge Carlos Bea wrote in April for the three-judge panel that “we gravely doubt that PETA can validly assert 'next friend' status” on behalf of the monkey.” But the panel felt compelled to allow it by a 2004 Ninth Circuit precedent that extended Article III standing to animals under certain statutes.
The Copyright Act was not one of those statutes, so PETA's suit for Naruto failed on grounds of statutory standing.
Judge N. Randy Smith concurred separately, saying that animals can never have next-friend standing under Article III. “Federal courts do not have jurisdiction to hear this case at all,” he wrote.
Both he and Bea called on the court to review the 2004 case, Cetacean Community v. Bush, en banc. Friday's order formalizes that position. A majority vote of the court's 22 active judges is required for en banc review.
Naruto v. Slater has made headlines around the world. It began after a macaque used a camera that Slater had set up on an Indonesian island to photograph its own likeness. PETA and a primatologist brought suit as Naruto's next friends, saying the monkey, not Slater, should be the true owner of the copyright.
U.S. District Judge William Orrick III ruled last year that, under Cetacean Community, animals do not have standing to bring lawsuits unless expressly provided for by statute. Following oral argument before the Ninth Circuit, Slater, Blurb and PETA struck a deal under which Slater agreed to donate 25 percent of future proceeds from the photos to support Naruto's habitat.
The Ninth Circuit elected to decide the case despite the settlement.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllOpenAI Tells Court It Will Seek to Consolidate Copyright Suits Under MDL
3 minute read'Rampant Piracy': US Record Labels File Copyright Suit Against French Distributor Believe
5 minute readKeker Secures Defense Win for EDA Software Company Real Intent in Synopsys Copyright Infringement Case
Trending Stories
- 1Call for Nominations: Elite Trial Lawyers 2025
- 2Senate Judiciary Dems Release Report on Supreme Court Ethics
- 3Senate Confirms Last 2 of Biden's California Judicial Nominees
- 4Morrison & Foerster Doles Out Year-End and Special Bonuses, Raises Base Compensation for Associates
- 5Tom Girardi to Surrender to Federal Authorities on Jan. 7
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250