More Idiocy from the Pinheads at PETA
Well the fools at PETA have been at it again, clogging up the courts with idiocy. And this latest one is a real winner.
They went to US court over the copyright rights for a photograph. The international copyright was owned by a British photographer. He’d left his camera unattended while visiting Indonesia’s Sulawesi Island, and some monkey managed to take a “selfie” with it. The photo is now quite famous.
PETA went to court and requested the copyright rights be reassigned. They wanted the copyright rights reassigned to the monkey. And they wanted PETA to be allowed to administer those copyrights “on behalf of the monkey”.
Yep, you read that right. They wanted the legal copyright rights – and thus any income derived from same – to be assigned to a freaking monkey. And they actually went to court to try and make that happen.
In a refreshing display of common sense, the judge essentially – in polite, legal language – told PETA to go pound sand.
Sheesh. These imbeciles should be required to have an escort any time they’re walking around in public, for their own protection and that of others.
Category: "Teh Stoopid", "Your Tax Dollars At Work", Legal, WTF?
Idiocy
FYI…there’s splinter group of PETA called the PCRM (Physician’s Committee for Responsible Medicine) they masquerade as an animal rights group, but they are just PETA, pushing a Vegan agenda, banning Pets etc etc.
Don’t give them your time or money.
There’s also a parody website called People Eating Tasty Animals. For a while in the early aughts, it had the peta.org domain until the courts said no.
Everyone has the right to be stupid but people like that abuse the privilege 24/7! They also bought the cemetery plot next to Harlan Sander’s grave in Corbin KY and erected a memorial to all of the chickens slaughtered for Kentucky Fried Chicken. I’d love to visit Corbin KY one of these days, eat some KFC and throw the chicken bones on the PETA memorial! Animals are delicious, that’s why I’m a member of People Eating Tasty Animals.
Truly a shining example of the mental defect know as libidiotism.
Worldwide libidiots stop at nothing to prove to themselves that they are the stupidest people on the planet. I am constantly amazed at the depths of moronic imbecilic thinking they stoop to just to show the world how dumb they really are.
Every day they work hard to prove it and what’s worse is that they are proud of their stupidity…
Here’s the worst part. Millions each year die of that stupidity, are held in bone breaking poverty and led down the path to self destruction by following their examples.
Sounds like they got their legal advice from the same crackhead who thought suing Yelp would be a good idea.
I’m a PETA member: People Enjoying Tasty Animals.
They say “meat is murder”, I think I’ll enjoy a nice Porterhouse piece of murder grilled medium over a charcoal grill tonight!
Make mine Medium Rare.
Meat is murder.
Tasty, tasty murder
I saw that photo. I think the monkey is one primate who is 100 times smarter than the petty peta primates.
If that isn’t the dumbest way to run a scam, what else is it? Are they going demand copyrights be assigned to tropical fish photographed during a dive? Sharks have been known to do selfies by bumping a ‘bait’ camera. Do the sharks get the copyright? Dolphins like to play with ring bubbles. Do they get artistic rights for that?
Call me a softie, but I’m not sure I’d have a problem with PETA giving personal counseling to a few sharks on copyright law…
The point is to Cost Other People Money, and get lots of publicity.
If the judge failed to leave the door open to an award for attorney fees against PETA, they won.
All of God’s creatures have a place in this world.
Right next to the mashed taters and gravy.
Do you think these knuckle heads would pass a NICS background check?
Probably hunh?
A former girlfriend of mine is really into this animal rights (PETA) thing. Weird to say the least.
The petty peta primates have a hidden agenda, which most people don’t know about, and that is to get rid of all the animals on the planet. I read that about 10 years ago, and also about how they denied it, but some of their ‘volunteers’ were taking dogs and cats out of shelters and killing them, were arrested for it, and told the police something about being given the right to do it.
They’ll deny it, of course, and say that they don’t think there should be any domesticated animals. Unfortunately for them, humans have had companion animals such as dogs for thousands of years, as companions and hunting assistance, so their ‘theories’ are pure cow splatters. And since humans and other primates are omnivores, not strict herbivores, their theories about nutrition are also pure bull splatters.
There’s always the hope that they’ll get a nasty dose of something from some of the critters they claim they care so much about.
I’m going to interject just a little here, Ex-PH2, because there is a small but important point I want to make about what you said. PETA doesn’t want to get rid of the ANIMALS; their end game is to get rid of the HUMANS. They link with groups like EARTH FIRST, who claim that we are a pathogenic parasite on the planet, and we need to be eradicated, so that the wild animals can live ‘naturally’ and ‘in peace.’ The reason they destroy animals in shelters (particularly their own), is because these animals aren’t ‘natural’ — they’re human-engineered, and to PETAs line of thinking, should also be destroyed for the sake of the wildlife.
I will also add that while these people are mentally deluded and morally bereft, they are far from ‘stupid.’ There are a lot of degrees of various kinds walking around in that organization, and they are one of the reasons the EPA has proved so troublesome in the last thirty years or so — it’s one of the first agencies the animal rights activists moved into and took over. Another one, sadly, is the Sierra Club. They are not the pro-hunting conservation group that most of the older folks on here will remember. They are very active now in shutting down hunting and closing wildlife areas to visitors. They’re all linked and they all are dangerous to our rights and way of life.
Well, then they’ve changed a lot, and not in a good way. I used to belong to the Sierra Club a very long time ago, but I quit because all they talked about was how sterile and barren cities are with no wildlife. And then I’d see skunks and possum ransacking the dumpsters, sparrows everywhere, and hawks and owls nesting on highrise buildings.
You’re right about dangerous and deluded, but they appear to be much more worse than they used to be. If they get rid of humans, how will they ever know if anything they said was true?
Yep, I know what you mean. I got a flyer in the mail from the Sierra Club about four or five years ago, and that was the first I ever heard of their current environmental activism. I started reading on their site and some of those they link to, and I was shocked to see how much they had changed from when I was a teenager. You wouldn’t recognize them anymore — I know I sure didn’t.
And you don’t have enough curl in your hair today, so I thought I would answer your other question with these two links. Get ready for nightmares:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voluntary_Human_Extinction_Movement
http://endoftheamericandream.com/archives/the-green-agenda-is-about-getting-rid-of-as-many-humans-as-possible
Can we start with blowing up those people first????
Here’s a bit of info I found in doing background for a story:
If you take all of the insects out of a biosystem, it will die off completely within one year.
There’s a reason we need CO2: plants use it. Without humans providing and abundance of CO2, plants will die off.
I think we should start find these ecoterrorists their own planet.
Blowing people up? Can we start with them?
You just said something that I disagree with. I think that is a first for me.
“There’s a reason we need CO2: plants use it. Without humans providing and abundance of CO2, plants will die off.”
I used to live in a place with a LOT of 500-year-old trees. I think that we can agree that humans were not creating much CO2 500 years ago so where did those trees come from?
The answer is that many natural processes produce CO2 and that is what provides the CO2 that plants “digest” in order to grow.
In pre-historic times, there was a balance – more or less – between the production and consumption of CO2. The CO2 level varied quite a bit over geologic time and so did Earth’s plant life. All of that oil and natural gas we find and use comes from old plant life.
The argument made by the climate change guys is that humans produce way more CO2 than the existing natural processes and the excess throws that balance all out of wack … et cetera. I don’t want to start an argument about it. I bring it up to point out that is the basis for those fruitcakes’ claim about humans versus the natural world. They think that they are all connected.
When they talk, I smell bat guano. YMMV.
You and me both. Best evidence is that atmospheric CO2 levels were far higher during the Jurassic and Cretaceous Eras than they are today. There were no humans around then.
Here’s a reference to Pleistocene level fluctuations.
http://www.britannica.com/science/Pleistocene-Epoch
Note that the time periods go back to 2.588+ million years in the past, long before modern humans emerged and started building campfires. Atmospheric O2 level fluctuations occur frequently on this planet.
Okay, I was making a general statement that did not seem to be general, but the point was that CO2 is necessary for a balanced biosystem. During the Carboniferous period, O2 levels were far higher than they are now, hence the size of dragonflies that had wingspans up to 2 feet and centipedes up to 3 feet long. Higher O2 levels allow some genera to exhibit gigantism.
Where do those 500 year old trees come from?
Are you aware that those very old and quite large trees have canopies that support and sustain ecosystems of insects, mammals, arachnids and birds, among other things, that were previously undiscovered until someone started climbing up to the canopies?
You’re mistaken about plants being the sole source of organic material for crude oil It comes from all biota, including animals, which includes insects. Bacterial digestion is the process that breaks organic matter down into crude oil. It is not a one-time process, either. Thomas Gold demonstrated that bacteria at deep levels continuously process organic matter into what we call crude oil and gas. It’s a byproduct of bacterial digestion. It’s the reason crude oil frakked at 12,500 feet is less ‘sweet’ than crude oil pumped from a more shallow well.
If you really want me to get into this, I can easily crank out abut 45 pages line-spaced at 1.5 for you to read.
To make my self more clear, the Carboniferous period was over 600 million years ago, long before dinosaurs were even a bright idea. I have some iron-ore accretion fossils from that period that I found on a fossil-hunting trip at the Braidwood retention ponds.
Cyanobacteria are considered to be responsible for the removal of toxic gases in the early atmosphere and from early surface water, but that process took place over a couple of billion years.
Want me to go on?
PN, part of what you’re talking about is one of the fundamental issues at stake in the current confrontation at Malheur in Oregon. Unfortunately, at least it seems to me, a lot of the relevant discourse about such things has been preempted by the discussion about personalities such as Brian Cavalier and Jon Ritzheimer. One of the more interesting perspectives, it ran in the Oregonian earlier this week, is a congressional speech by Greg Walden whose district includes Harney County. It’s longish, but worth reading if you haven’t seen it:
http://www.oregonlive.com/pacific-northwest-news/index.ssf/2016/01/post_227.html
They got their legal advice from the two “lawers” that are official members of the DRG.
I was thinking the same thing. That was some Bernathian level legal wrangling by those PETA folks. And much like with Bernath the judge told PETA to fuck off. Hey Bernath, fuck you.
Apparently the monkey was unavailable for comment….
This is no different than any other bullshit scam some asshole tries to perpetrate by appropriate someone else’s income as their own.
I do find it quite entertaining that they were quite prepared to act on the monkey’s behalf, in essence as the owner of the monkey, in order to profit from the image of the monkey.
In other words even they in their idiotic court documents admitted the monkey was incapable of exercising a basic human right of copy right ownership and therefore was unqualified to act on his or her own monkey self…sort of defeats the whole, same as us bullshit they spout all the time.
The local PETA assholes here in the PRoM don’t like me much, they tried once to appeal to my religious self without realizing I don’t have one.
They were not happy when I explained that I am an Apex predator and consequently any lower life form whether plant or animal is accurately described as a food source just like the lion and bear consider herd animals prey. We Apex predators eat whatever we can kill and we harbor no moral qualms about acting as nature intended when we kill.
They were horrified, and I was amused at their naive gullibility.
Hondo, the link is broken – easy enough to google, but I thought I’d let you know!
Thanks. There’s a minor font issue between my word processor and WordPress that sometimes causes URLs to get hosed when I post an article. I missed that one.
It’s now fixed.
Monkeys & PETA are both pooh flingers.
These are the same idiots that sued Sea World claiming they were profiting off of slave labor.
I’m going to break my fast food rule next week and go get a cheeseburger with really crisp fries, pickles, tomato, lettuce and raw onion.
With every bite I take, I will tell myself I’m taking a bite out of some petapeep’s backside, and chew vigorously before swallowing.
http://www.political-humor.org/i-ate-a-guy-in-peta-shirt-yesterday.shtml
I think the PETA people should be fed, alive, to zoo animals.
If they want us all to live like herbivores, they should at least be willing to lead by example and play their proper role in the food chain.
And if you charged admission for people to watch the PETA idiots being shoved into the bear pit, the crocodile pond, the big cat enclosure, etc., the whole program would turn a tidy profit for the zoo.
To show my appreciation for the fine folks of PETA, I’m gonna eat me a nice big plate of the flesh of a cute defenseless animal for breakfast. And another for lunch. And another for dinner.
“These imbeciles should be required to have an escort any time they’re walking around in public, for their own protection and that of others.”
Don’t forget the leash and pooper scooper.
Always wondered: What do the cats and dogs that are pets of PETA folks eat?
Kale? Lettuce? Asparagus? I wonder if any of the petaphiles bother to check the ingredients on the bags of cat and dog food.
Vegetarian pet food. No shit. My sister feeds it to her animals. It’s made by some company in the Midwest and she orders it through the mail.
I know, my vet has an 8lb bag and a 20lb bag of it on his shelf. He says he never should have ordered even those 2 bags, all people do when they read the ingredients is laugh. Then put it back and get regular dog or cat food.
The stuff is horridly expensive. We could probably feed a ton of starving children somewhere, for what that pet food costs.
The reason my sister has her pets on it, is she has a dog (probably the only dog on the entire eastern seaboard) that has allergies to animal by-products. (Yeah, I know, you can’t make this shit up, right?) The dog developed a rash after she got her, that developed into open pustules, particularly on her face and in and around her mouth. It finally took a visit to a homeopathic veterinarian to find out that some dogs and cats get allergies to the proteins found in the byproducts that are used in commercial pet food, proteins found in the nervous tissue, the digestive tract, in hair and feathers, etc., all of which are found in commercial pet products. So that is why my sister switched her pets over to this organic, vegetarian pet food. (And yes, the dog’s rash went away with the switch in diet.)
I will add this, in the interest of full disclosure. I do eat meat and meat products; however, I get organic products as much as possible — milk, eggs, meat, fish. And I mean certified organic, not “I think it is because I want it to be” organic. In every case, it can cost two to five times as much as regular product. Why? I believe an animal raised in an uncrowded, natural environment and killed quickly and humanely is far more healthful to eat than an animal raised in a feedlot and run through a slaughterhouse. There are only a few studies on this, but anybody that eats healthy wild game knows the benefits of that meat. It’s lean and tasty, and free of the additives found in domestic meat, particularly antibiotics and growth hormones. I would recommend, for anybody that does enjoy eating meat, to turn to organic meat and meat products, as much as possible.
I hate to be the one to do this, but the OP’s assertion that the photographer, David Slater, was “protecting his international copyright” is a bit off as there is no such thing as an “international copyright.” Copyrights are issued and may be recognized in other countries if the 1) there is an copyright agreement or treaty between the countries and 2) the work is allowed to be copyrighted in the other countries. ( http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ38a.pdf ) Slater had applied for the copyright to the picture in England and sought to have the copyright extended to the US. After the image was used on several sites inj the US, Slater sent notices to have the image removed saying he owned the copyright. The problem was that he did not. Under US law he could not copyright the image. First, US copyright law requires that the person seeking the copyright materially adds to the artistic expression. (That’s the short version. As an example, if you give your child a box of crayons and the kid draws a picture, it is the child, not you who can apply for the copyright. Merely supplying device used to create something does not materially add to the expression.) Slater has changed his story over time as to how the image first came to be saying initially that the tripod on which the camera was mounted fell and the macaque monkey picked up the camera and took the shot by accident. He then changed the story to the the camera was on a rock and the monkey, who had seen him using the camera before, took the image because he was imitating Slater. Slater contended that the image was copyrighted because it was his camera. That contention failed and the US Copyright Office (USCO) denied the copyright here in the US. Slater then said that he knew the monkey would take the picture which is why he put the camera on the rock. The USCO rejected that as well. Slater tried saying that because the monkey could not hold a copyright under US law as “non-humans” may… Read more »