An Indonesian monkey that achieved Internetcelebrity with a grinning selfie cannot own thephotograph’s copyright, a federal judge said thisweek.

　　本周(1月3日至9日)，美國一位聯(lián)邦法官稱，因大笑自拍在網(wǎng)上走紅的一只印尼猴子不擁有照片的版權(quán)。

　　People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals had argued in United States District Court in SanFrancisco that the rights to the photograph, which was snapped using a photographer’sunattended camera, rightfully belonged to the monkey, a crested macaque.

　　善待動物組織(Ethical Treatment of Animals)在舊金山的美國地方法院為這只黑冠獼猴爭取照片所有權(quán)。照片是這只猴子用攝影師故意放在那里的相機自拍的。

　　In a tentative opinion on Wednesday, Judge William H. Orrick disagreed.

　　周三(1月6日)，威廉·H·奧里克法官(William H. Orrick)在一份初步意見書上對他們的主張表示反對。

　　“While Congress and the president can extend the protection of law to animals as well ashumans,” he wrote, “there is no indication that they did so in the copyright act.”

　　他寫道：“雖然國會和總統(tǒng)可以把法律保護的范圍擴展到不同人群甚至動物身上，但是在版權(quán)方面他們沒有這樣做過。”

　　The images were taken during a trip by the British photographer, David Slater, to theTangkoko Reserve on the Indonesian island of Sulawesi in 2011. He put his camera on a tripodamid a troop of macaques, setting it so it would automatically focus and wind, and waited forthe animals to get curious.

　　那些照片是英國攝影師大衛(wèi)·斯萊特(David Slater)2011年在印度尼西亞蘇拉威島的Tangkoko保護區(qū)(Tangkoko Reserve)拍攝的。他把相機放在三腳架上，設(shè)為自動對焦，置于一群獼猴中間，等待它們產(chǎn)生好奇心。

　　The results included the charming mug of the monkey, identified by PETA as a 6-year-oldmale, Naruto, grinning broadly and bucktoothed into the lens.

　　拍出的照片包括這只猴子迷人的笑臉。善待動物組織認出他是一只6歲大的公猴，綽號火影忍者(Naruto)。他對著鏡頭大笑，露出門牙。

　　Mr. Slater published a book, “Wildlife Personalities,” that included the pictures, and the imageswere widely shared online, including without permission by Wikipedia. When Mr. Slater askedthe crowd-sourced website to remove the image, it refused under much the same rationale asPETA: Mr. Slater didn’t press the shutter release, so the image was not his.

　　斯萊特出了一本名為《野生動物的個性》(Wildlife Personalities)的書，收錄了這些照片。這些照片在網(wǎng)上廣為流傳，維基百科(Wikipedia)也未經(jīng)授權(quán)用了照片。斯萊特要求這家由眾人編輯的網(wǎng)站撤掉這張照片，該網(wǎng)站以與善待動物組織相似的理由拒絕了他：照片不是斯萊特拍的，所以不歸他所有。

　　In September, PETA filed its lawsuit against Mr. Slater, his company, and Blurb, the companythat published his book, asking the judge to allow it to represent Naruto and distribute theimage’s proceeds for the benefit of the Indonesian reserve’s crested macaques, a criticallyendangered species.

　　去年9月，善待動物組織起訴斯萊特以及他的公司及其出版商Blurb，要求法官允許該組織代表火影忍者將照片的收益用于保護印度尼西亞保護區(qū)的嚴重瀕危物種黑冠獼猴。

　　The photographer’s lawyers asked a judge to dismiss the lawsuit on the grounds that amonkey lacks legal standing. Its motion, at times, struck a mocking tone.

　　這位攝影師的律師們請求法官撤回起訴，理由是猴子沒有法律地位。這份動議書不時帶有揶揄口吻。

　　“A monkey, an animal-rights organization and a primatologist walk into federal court to sue forinfringement of the monkey’s claimed copyright. What seems like the setup for a punch line isreally happening.”

　　“一只猴子、一個動物權(quán)利保護組織和一位靈長類動物學家走進聯(lián)邦法院，起訴這只猴子所謂的版權(quán)遭到侵犯。這聽起來像是一則笑話的開頭，沒想到還真發(fā)生了�！�

　　Judge Orrick explained from the bench on Wednesday that he had no authority to extendsuch rights to animals.

　　周三(1月6日)，奧里克法官在法庭上解釋說，他無權(quán)將這樣的權(quán)利賦予動物。

　　“This is an issue for Congress and the president,” he said, according to Ars Technica. “If theythink animals should have the right of copyright, they’re free, I think, under the Constitution,to do that.”