|
|
Back to UserFriendly Strip Comments Index
|
Copyright v. Piracy: "It's not theft." | by Illiad | 2008-08-27 16:36:18 |
|
there's at least 2 issues, here | by swisscheese | 2008-08-27 18:07:54 |
|
They are: | by Illiad | 2008-08-27 18:21:17 |
| Well, then you get the kind of situation, where... |
by swisscheese |
2008-08-27 22:30:33 |
... the artist says;
"I don't like your politics -- so you can't play *my* music at your rally".
"I don't approve of your medical ethics -- so you can't display my work in your clinic".
"I think so-and-so is a racist/sexist/religious fundamentalist/communist/talentless hack -- so you can't show his work near to mine in your gallery. Or at any rate, show my work near his".
(You think I'm making this stuff up? I wish!)
Actually, in Europe, this has been to some extent actually incorporated into copyright law, under the rubric of the "moral rights" of the artist. I have mixed feelings about this -- it sounded like a good idea at first blush, but perhaps the remedy is worse than the ailment.
I agree that creators should have some defense against commercial exploitation of his/her work by amoral parasites, and deserves -- has earned -- the opportunity (not right) to profit from his endeavor. But that doesn't mean I (or the law) agree that an artist "owns" anything more than the legally-endowed copyright -- which is something quite different from owning the image, (or song, or music or poem or other artistic expression) itself. |
|
[ Reply ] |
|
|
[Todays Cartoon Discussion]
[News Index]
|
|
