(SAN FRANCISCO) — Attorneys announced a settlement Monday in a lawsuit over who owns the copyright to selfie photographs taken by a monkey before a federal appeals court could answer the novel legal question.

Under the deal, the photographer whose camera was used to take the photos agreed to donate 25 percent of any future revenue from the images to charities dedicated to protecting crested macaques in Indonesia, lawyers for an animal-rights group said.

Attorneys for the group and the photographer, David Slater, asked the San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to dismiss the case and throw out a lower court decision that said animals cannot own copyrights.

Andrew J. Dhuey, an attorney for Slater, declined to comment on how much money the photos have generated or whether Slater would keep all of the remaining 75 percent of future revenue.

There was no immediate ruling from the 9th Circuit.

The People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals sued on behalf of the macaque monkey in 2015, seeking financial control of the photographs for the benefit of the monkey named Naruto that snapped the photos with Slater's camera.

"PETA and David Slater agree that this case raises important, cutting-edge issues about expanding legal rights for non-human animals, a goal that they both support, and they will continue their respective work to achieve this goal," Slater and PETA said in a joint statement.

Lawyers for Slater argued that his company, Wildlife Personalities Ltd., owns worldwide commercial rights to the photos, including a now-famous selfie of the monkey's toothy grin.

The photos were taken during a 2011 trip to Sulawesi, Indonesia, with an unattended camera owned by Slater.

U.S. District Judge William Orrick said in a ruling in favor of Slater last year that "while Congress and the president can extend the protection of law to animals as well as humans, there is no indication that they did so in the Copyright Act." The 9th Circuit was considering PETA's appeal.

The lawyers notified the appeals court on Aug. 4 that they were nearing a settlement and asked the judges not to rule. A three-judge panel of the 9th Circuit heard oral arguments in the case in July. </s> SAN FRANCISCO (AP) — The battle over now-famous selfie photographs taken by a macaque monkey will head back to federal court.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in San Francisco on Wednesday will hear arguments on whether an animal can own the copyright to a photograph. The proceedings will be broadcast online.

A federal judge last year ruled that the monkey cannot be declared the photos’ copyright owner, saying that while Congress and the president can extend the protection of law to animals as well as humans, there is no indication that they did so in the Copyright Act.

The lawsuit filed in 2015 by People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals sought a court order allowing PETA to administer all proceeds from the photos for the benefit of the monkey, which it identified as Naruto, a free-living crested macaque from Indonesia.

PETA says Naruto has been accustomed to cameras throughout his life and took the selfies when he saw himself in the reflection of the lens. The animal rights organizations says the monkey drew the connection between pressing the shutter release and the change in his reflection, and made different facial expressions while pressing the shutter release.

The photos of the monkey of a toothy grin were taken in 2011 in Sulawesi, Indonesia with an unattended camera owned by British nature photographer David Slater.

Slater says the British copyright obtained for the photos by his company, Wildlife Personalities Ltd., should be honored worldwide

PETA sued Slater and his San Francisco-based self-publishing company Blurb, which published a book called “Wildlife Personalities” that includes the “monkey selfie” photos.

If successful, this will be the first time that an animal is declared the owner of property, instead of being declared a piece of property himself, PETA attorney Jeffrey Kerr said.

“When science and technology advance, the law adapts,” Kerr said. “There is nothing in the Copyright Act limiting ownership based on species, and PETA is asking for an interpretation of the act that acknowledges today’s scientific consensus that macaque monkeys can create an original work.”

© Copyright 2017 The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed. </s> SAN FRANCISCO | A curious monkey with a toothy grin and a knack for pressing a camera button was back in the spotlight Wednesday as a federal appeals court heard arguments on whether an animal can hold a copyright to selfie photos.

A 45-minute hearing before a three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco attracted crowds of law students and curious citizens who often burst into laughter. The federal judges also chuckled at times at the novelty of the case, which involves a monkey in another country that is unaware of the fuss.

Andrew Dhuey, attorney for British nature photographer David Slater, said “monkey see, monkey sue” is not good law under any federal act.

Jeffrey Kerr, general counsel to the People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA), speaks to reporters outside of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco, Wednesday, July 12, 2017. Attorneys for David Slater, a wildlife photographer whose camera was used by a monkey to snap selfies, asked a federal appeals court to end a lawsuit seeking to give the animal rights to the photos. PETA sought a court order in 2015 allowing it to administer all proceeds from the photos to benefit the monkey. (AP Photo/Jeff Chiu) Attorney Andrew Dhuey, from left, representing photographer David Slater, attorney Angela Dunning, representing Blurb, a San Francisco-based self-publishing company, and Trevor Cooper, Legal Counsel at Blurb, speak to reporters outside of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco, Wednesday, July 12, 2017. Attorneys for Slater, a wildlife photographer whose camera was used by a monkey to snap selfies, asked a federal appeals court to end a lawsuit seeking to give the animal rights to the photos. People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals sought a court order in 2015 allowing it to administer all proceeds from the photos to benefit the monkey. (AP Photo/Jeff Chiu)

Naruto is a free-living crested macaque who snapped perfectly framed selfies in 2011 that would make even the Kardashians proud.

People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals sued Slater and the San Francisco-based self-publishing company Blurb, which published a book called “Wildlife Personalities” that includes the monkey selfies, for copyright infringement. It sought a court order in 2015 allowing it to administer all proceeds from the photos taken in a wildlife reserve in Sulawesi, Indonesia to benefit the monkey.

Slater says the British copyright for the photos obtained by his company, Wildlife Personalities Ltd., should be honored.

PETA attorney David Schwarz argued that Naruto was accustomed to cameras and took the selfies when he saw himself in the reflection of the lens.

A federal judge ruled against PETA and the monkey last year, saying he lacked the right to sue because there was no indication that Congress intended to extend copyright protection to animals.

Throughout Wednesday’s hearing, Schwarz pushed back, arguing that the case came down to one simple fact: photographs can be copyrighted and Naruto is the author.

“We have to look at the word ‘authorship’ in the broadest sense,” he said.

The judges grilled him on why PETA has status to represent Naruto and said that “having genuine care for the animal” isn’t enough to establish “next friend” relationship, which is required to represent the monkey in court.

The judges did not issue a ruling Wednesday.

Angela Dunning, an attorney for Blurb, wondered at the possibilities if they do not prevail.

“Where does it end? If a monkey can sue for copyright infringement, what else can a monkey do?” she said after the hearing.

PETA’s general counsel Jeff Kerr said after the hearing that the group plans to use money from the photos to protect monkey habitats and help people study the monkeys.

“PETA is clearly representing Naruto’s best interests,” he said.

Dhuey said the legal antics were more of a publicity stunt by PETA than a lawsuit. He quipped after the hearing that Naruto made a tactical mistake by not appearing in court.

“It’s like he doesn’t even care,” he said before walking away from cameras.

Associated Press writer Janie Har also contributed to this report. </s> Attorneys representing a macaque monkey have agreed to a compromise in a case where they asserted the animal owned the copyright to selfie photos it had shot with a photographer’s camera.

Under the deal, the photographer agreed to donate 25 per cent of any future revenue from the images to charities dedicated to protecting crested macaques in Indonesia, said the lawyers from People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals who filed the lawsuit.

Attorneys for the group and the photographer, David Slater, on Monday asked the San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to dismiss the case and throw out a lower-court decision that said animals cannot own copyrights.
• Macaque monkey who took selfies can’t be declared copyright owner of photos: judge
• The sentient debate: Animal legal rights at centre of recent court cases
• PETA’s latest cause: Activists suing photographer to give this macaque copyright of famous monkey selfies

Andrew J. Dhuey, an attorney for Slater, declined to comment on how much money the photos have generated or whether Slater would keep all of the remaining 75 per cent of future revenue.

“PETA and David Slater agree that this case raises important, cutting-edge issues about expanding legal rights for non-human animals, a goal that they both support, and they will continue their respective work to achieve this goal,” Slater and PETA said in a joint statement.

There was no immediate ruling from the 9th Circuit on the dismissal.

PETA sued on behalf of the monkey in 2015, seeking financial control of the photographs for the benefit of the monkey named Naruto that snapped the photos with Slater’s camera.

Lawyers for Slater argued that his company, Wildlife Personalities Ltd., owns worldwide commercial rights to the photos, including a now-famous selfie of the monkey’s toothy grin.

The photos were taken during a 2011 trip to Sulawesi, Indonesia, with an unattended camera owned by Slater. Slater said the British copyright obtained for the photos by Wildlife Personalities should be honoured worldwide.

U.S. District Judge William Orrick said in a ruling in favour of Slater last year that “while Congress and the president can extend the protection of law to animals as well as humans, there is no indication that they did so in the Copyright Act.” The 9th Circuit was considering PETA’s appeal.

The lawyers notified the appeals court on Aug. 4 that they were nearing a settlement and asked the judges not to rule. A three-judge panel of the 9th Circuit heard oral arguments in the case in July. </s> SAN FRANCISCO – A curious monkey with a toothy grin and a knack for pressing a camera button was back in the spotlight Wednesday as a federal appeals court heard arguments on whether an animal can hold a copyright to selfie photos.

A 45-minute hearing before a three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco attracted crowds of law students and curious citizens who often burst into laughter. The federal judges also chuckled at times at the novelty of the case, which involves a monkey in another country that is unaware of the fuss.

Andrew Dhuey, attorney for British nature photographer David Slater, said “monkey see, monkey sue” is not good law under any federal act.

Naruto is a free-living crested macaque who snapped perfectly framed selfies in 2011 that would make even the Kardashians proud.

People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals sued Slater and the San Francisco-based self-publishing company Blurb, which published a book called “Wildlife Personalities” that includes the monkey selfies, for copyright infringement. It sought a court order in 2015 allowing it to administer all proceeds from the photos taken in a wildlife reserve in Sulawesi, Indonesia to benefit the monkey.

Slater says the British copyright for the photos obtained by his company, Wildlife Personalities Ltd., should be honored.

PETA attorney David Schwarz argued that Naruto was accustomed to cameras and took the selfies when he saw himself in the reflection of the lens.

A federal judge ruled against PETA and the monkey last year, saying he lacked the right to sue because there was no indication that Congress intended to extend copyright protection to animals.

Throughout Wednesday’s hearing, Schwarz pushed back, arguing that the case came down to one simple fact: photographs can be copyrighted and Naruto is the author.

“We have to look at the word `authorship’ in the broadest sense,” he said.

The judges grilled him on why PETA has status to represent Naruto and said that “having genuine care for the animal” isn’t enough to establish “next friend” relationship, which is required to represent the monkey in court.

The judges did not issue a ruling Wednesday.

Angela Dunning, an attorney for Blurb, wondered at the possibilities if they do not prevail.

“Where does it end? If a monkey can sue for copyright infringement, what else can a monkey do?” she said after the hearing.

PETA’s general counsel Jeff Kerr said after the hearing that the group plans to use money from the photos to protect monkey habitats and help people study the monkeys.

“PETA is clearly representing Naruto’s best interests,” he said.

Dhuey said the legal antics were more of a publicity stunt by PETA than a lawsuit. He quipped after the hearing that Naruto made a tactical mistake by not appearing in court.

“It’s like he doesn’t even care,” he said before walking away from cameras. </s> Wikimedia screenshot by Chris Matyszczyk/CNET

Can animals own the copyright to their selfies?

That's now up to a federal appeals court to decide.

On Wednesday, the 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals questioned lawyers in a 2015 case surrounding a macaque monkey named Naruto who took selfies using British nature photographer David Slater's camera during a 2011 trip to Indonesia. PETA sued Slater and self-publishing company Blurb, arguing the monkey owned the copyright to the photos. It wants to administer all proceeds for the benefit of the monkey.

Slater says the copyright for the photos, which are held by his company Wildlife Personalities, should be honored worldwide.

Last year, a federal judge ruled that the monkey didn't own the copyright to the photos. Now, a three-judge panel in San Francisco is asking PETA's attorney why the group should represent the monkey's interests.

Attorney Angela Dunning, who represents Blurb, said they're not concerned about the case being retried, and that they feel optimistic. She said the court made it clear that it was going to either affirm the district court's dismiss order or vacate its decision and dismiss on the grounds that PETA can't serve as a next friend.

"We'd like for the case to be over at this point," Dunning said.

PETA general counsel Jeff Kerr said the law makes it clear that the copyright belongs to the author, who in this case was Naruto.

"If this was any other photographer, there would be no question about entitlement to copyright," Kerr said. "There's no valid reason to exclude Naruto from copyright simply because he's not a human being."

Update, July 13 at 9:55 a.m. PT: Adds comment from Jeff Kerr.

CNET Magazine: Check out a sample of the stories in CNET's newsstand edition.

CNET en Español: Get all your tech news and reviews in Spanish. </s> A settlement was announced Monday in the lawsuit over who owned the rights to a selfie taken by a monkey.

The odd case gained worldwide attention after People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals sued, claiming copyright infringement and arguing that since an Indonesian crested macaque named Naruto had taken the photo, the animal owned the copyright.

Attorneys for PETA, nature photographer David Slater and self-publishing site Blurb.com announced in a joint statement Monday that the animal-rights group would drop its appeal of the suit, and that Slater had agreed to donate 25% of future earnings from the photo to charities to protect the primates.

“PETA and David Slater agree that this case raises important, cutting-edge issues about expanding legal rights for nonhuman animals, a goal that they both support, and they will continue their respective work to achieve this goal,” they said in the statement.

PETA had claimed that macaques were “sophisticated beings worthy of having legal ownership of their own intellectual property.”

Slater said he made the camera accessible to the macaques, hoping they would play with it and take photos, and argued that ownership rights belonged to his company, Wildlife Personalities Ltd., which had published the photo in a book.

The case was pending before the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, after a lower court in January 2016 sided with Slater, ruling that animals could not hold copyrights. PETA was appealing that ruling. </s> A lawsuit exploring whether animals own the copyright to their own selfies is finally over.

The bizarre legal journey began when a crested macaque monkey named Naruto took selfies using British nature photographer David Slater's camera during a 2011 trip to Indonesia. The People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) sued Slater and self-publishing company Blurb in 2015, arguing the monkey owned the copyright to the photos and proposing it administer all proceeds for the benefit of the monkey.

As part of a settlement announced Monday, the photos will belong to Slater, but he will donate 25 percent of future revenue derived from the image to charities that protect Naruto and other crested macaque monkeys.

"PETA and David Slater agree that this case raises important, cutting-edge issues about expanding legal rights for nonhuman animals, a goal that they both support, and they will continue their respective work to achieve this goal," the parties said in a joint statement.

The photo, captured when monkey grabbed Slater's camera, posed and clicked, became an instant hit appearing in newspapers, magazines, websites and on TV shows around the world. But it took a controversial turn when Slater threatened to sue Wikimedia, a database of millions of images, videos, and audio files that are free for anyone to use.

Slater was frustrated that Wikimedia, the US-based nonprofit behind Wikipedia, told him he didn't own the copyright to the image, thereby depriving him of revenue from licensing the image for publication. Last year, a federal judge ruled the monkey didn't own the copyright to the photos.

The 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals took up the case in July, with the San Francisco panel asking PETA's attorney why the group should represent the monkey's interests.

Tech Enabled: CNET chronicles tech's role in providing new kinds of accessibility.

Technically Literate: Original works of short fiction with unique perspectives on tech, exclusively on CNET. </s> Attorney Andrew Dhuey, from left, representing photographer�David�Slater, attorney Angela Dunning, representing Blurb, a San Francisco-based self-publishing company, and Trevor Cooper, Legal Counsel at Blurb, speak to reporters outside of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco, Wednesday, July 12, 2017. Attorneys for Slater, a wildlife photographer whose camera was used by a monkey to snap selfies, asked a federal appeals court to end a lawsuit seeking to give the animal rights to the photos. People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals sought a court order in 2015 allowing it to administer all proceeds from the photos to benefit the monkey. (AP Photo/Jeff Chiu)
The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in San Francisco hears a case on whether or not a Celebes crested macaque owns its selfie.