In January a judge in the Northern District of California
dismissed a complaint which asked that a monkey named Naruto be the
owner of a copyright in a photograph. The order of dismissal can be
downloaded
here. The court held that there was no standing under the
Copyright Act since a monkey is not an "author," even
though there is no definition of that term in the Act. But the
court stated that the 9th Circuit has observed that the Act has
left the term undefined to provide for flexibility.
Seizing upon this dicta, this
amicus brief filed by Professor Agustin Fuentes contends that
Naruto is an author since the action by the monkey of taking the
photo was purposeful, voluntary, and the animal is self-aware. The
Professor contends that the Act should be interpreted to be
consistent with current indisputable scientific consensus, and that
the 9th Circuit has held that copyright law "has been one of
gradual expansion in the types of works accorded
protection."
