Shutterstock ban all unnatural photos of apes and monkeys after appeal from PETA
Dec 29, 2017
Dunja Đuđić
Dunja Djudjic is a multi-talented artist based in Novi Sad, Serbia. With 15 years of experience as a photographer, she specializes in capturing the beauty of nature, travel, concerts, and fine art. In addition to her photography, Dunja also expresses her creativity through writing, embroidery, and jewelry making.
Share:
As a result of a recent appeal from PETA, Shutterstock has decided to ban all photos of monkeys and apes in unnatural situations. The photos will not only be banned from Shutterstock, but also from its subsidiary Bigstock.
The ban includes the photos of primates in all settings unnatural to them. But, even if the photos are digitally manipulated to just look unnatural – they are also not welcome on Shutterstock either.
As PETA writes, monkeys and apes used for photographing are “typically very young and deprived of everything that is natural and important to them, including contact with their mothers.” They claim that the photos of animals in such unnatural conditions can harm conservation efforts. Additionally, they may also increase the demand to keep these animals as pets. PETA also points out that what we see as a “grin” in chimpanzees is actually a facial expression for fear.
Reportedly, PETA has discussed these issues with Shutterstock. They came to the agreement that photos like this won’t be allowed on this stock photo website anymore. From now on, Shutterstock will ban all photos and videos that depict monkeys and apes in these situations:
- Wearing clothing or accessories, such as hats or sunglasses
- Being shown in a studio setting or human environment, such as an office or circus
- Exhibiting trained or unnatural behavior, such as dancing or performing
- Engaging in unnatural interactions with humans, such as holding hands or being held
In addition to actually placing monkeys and apes in unnatural situations, the photos where they are photoshopped to appear this way are also banned. Of course, there are some photos that remain allowed. You can still upload photos of these animals in zoos, living free in natural habitats, or living free in Asian cities. Although, we could argue how “natural” the zoos are for them.
There’s no word, though, what will happen with the stock photos of monkeys and apes that are already on Shutterstock. It’s not said whether the photographers should remove them, or they can sell them further.
PETA writes that “Shutterstock’s decision is a reflection of evolving industry standards, as well as a sea change in public opinion.” Considering that many ad agencies and TV and film producers have stopped using these images, PETA hopes that other stock photo websites will follow Shutterstock’s example.
[via PetaPixel]
Dunja Đuđić
Dunja Djudjic is a multi-talented artist based in Novi Sad, Serbia. With 15 years of experience as a photographer, she specializes in capturing the beauty of nature, travel, concerts, and fine art. In addition to her photography, Dunja also expresses her creativity through writing, embroidery, and jewelry making.
Related Posts
Court finally rules in the ‘monkey selfie’ case: no, monkeys can’t be copyright owners
This creepy little spy camera goes underwater to show snow monkeys’ grooming rituals
The Copyright Battle Between PETA and Viral Monkey Photographer Just Got Weirder
David Slater and PETA could finally settle over the monkey selfie case
Join the Discussion
DIYP Comment Policy
Be nice, be on-topic, no personal information or flames.
25 responses to “Shutterstock ban all unnatural photos of apes and monkeys after appeal from PETA”
Jobsworths….
PETA is a bunch of nutcrackers…
Seriously what’s wrong with these people? That sort of interaction must be heart warming for both parties?
PETA are total cockwombles who do more harm than good !!
Great use of the word ‘Cockwombles’… love it
Forbidden? WTH does PETA think they are to have images forbidden, the dictator of North Korea? Adolph Hitler?
am I the only one here to think that it is going a bit far sillier with this thing they call PETA?
My guess is they go after the makers of Gorilla Glue as it is neither made from or produced by Gorillas.
Have PETA not realised that after the monkey selfie fiasco (and a few other wastes of resources) that pretty much the whole intelligent world see them as a laughing stock?
Laughing-stock photo, more like it.
Fake News much?
I can’t find any other source than the PETA website.
And, when I go on Shutterstock, there is nothing about it and when I do a search, I find hundreds and hundreds of pictures of apes and monkey in “unnatural” settings.
Until I see another source other than PETA, I won’t believe it.
Then again, it might be me that can’t search properly.
Or Shutterstock is still working on removing those images and is not done yet and wants to announce it when it’s done, or any other explanation.
Disclaimer, my comment has nothing to do on my stance on this subject and is only about the legitimacy of it since I can’t find a source other than PETA’s website claiming this with no source linked.
Can PETA make anyone do anything beyond being annoyed?
I thought PETA means People Eating Tits Ass???
Does this mean I won’t be able to get stills of Lancelot Link and the Evolution Revolution’s reunion gig on Shutterstock?
Bad move shutterstock…
Here we go banning things. Next it will be books again. Wake up people.
Fuck off PETA, go and do something semi worthwhile.
Does it also mean no zoo or animal reserve will be accepted.
Now you can not discriminate one type of mammal so the ACLU and PETA will have all mammals banned. Oh and why just mammals, need to include reptiles, fish…all living things and wait…single cell organisms are alive so… where does it stop?
PETA/ ACLU is worse than ISIS in terms of bring down our society values
maybe not worse, but a lot more efficient.
Oh good grief.
Photography is art ! WTF !!!
Sad. Giving in to those PETA freaks.
Shutterstock can do as they please, others don’t have to follow. If they think PETA’s arguments relevant they can. No court order (or however it is called in the US, I’m not a native speaker nor a lawyer) here, so this would be just an agreement between two entities.
Another thing would be if other stock photo agencies would follow …