This is a ridiculous argument from Miller. Theft is theft, period. Peple have a right to legal protection of their property, which includes their words, actions, images they create. Why does Miller think museums should not protect their rights to their property? At any rate this discussion among ourselves is pointless because it engages legalities regarding the various divisions between private property and public domain that only legal scholars and specialized lawyers can answer. WC
--- On Thu, 2/26/09, Chris Miller <[email protected]> wrote: > From: Chris Miller <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: It only makes sense that you would borro w from the past, take > w hat s best, what evoke s a response in yo urself from the > To: [email protected] > Date: Thursday, February 26, 2009, 10:07 AM > Michael's several analogies between physical and > intellectual property can be > dismissed for the many reasons given by Cheerskep. > > And his concern for an "accurate reproduction" > should be dismissed as well -- > at least as involving anything other than the reputation of > the original > writer or artist. > > Because alterations can be better, or worse, or just > different from the > original -- so no harm is necessarily done by making them. > (it was a legal > dispute over an Obama poster that started this thread -- > and who is to say > that the popular alteration is any worse than the original > photograph ?) > > Haven't we all learned, by now, that authenticity is no > guarantee for quality. > (for example: the Otto Munch exhibit now at the A.I.C. > contains a scaled down > version of Rodin's "The Kiss". It's > awful -- just as bad as the cheesy > catastrophe offered for sale online from statue.com. Did > Rodin authorize > either of those versions ? Who knows - > who cares - the quality is just as bad regardless. It > seems that Rodin had a > Laissez-faire attidude towards his work. He made the best > originals that he > could - but then he let his workshop make whatever > reproductions could be > sold. And I don't think his reputation has suffered a > bit for it. ) > > > We can expect that intellectual property will be adjusted, > over time, to suit > the taste (good or bad) of various audiences. I don't > see any harm there, as > long the original version , if it still exists, is not > destroyed. > > So the only real issues regarding copyright are those that > are personal: i.e. > the finances and reputation of the artist. > > Those are indeed important -- but against those concerns, > we should also > consider the concerns of the public -- not just as a body > politic -- but as a > civilization of values, ideals, and standards that > continually needs to renew > itself through educational experiences. > > Concerning the reproductions that art museums are putting > online -- The Louvre > claims that's it's got everything (30,000 pieces) > up -- and it is does a good > job - with 33k images as well as additional detail shots > and alternative views > of sculpture. The Chicago museum is about half-way towards > putting everything > online --but no additional > details views are offered, and 33k is not really very big. > The British Museum > is currently only showing the highlights of their > collection (2000 pieces) - > but the size is about 50k -- and if you sign up, they > promise to send to you > 250k images as requested. (WOW!) The Uffizi site says that > it offers a > room-by-room virtual tour of its collection -- but, of > course, being in Italy, > it doesn't work today, come back tomorrow. The > Hermitage also offers > highlights of the collection -- and they are zoomable up > to 160k (very nice) > . And finally, the Prado may be the best -- since it > promises to eventually > put everything online -- and their images are zoomable up > to 2 meg. > (incredible!) > > And the worst would be exemplifed by the Cleveland Museum > -- which only shows > a part of its collection at 16kb -- but for $30 each, > users can purchase an > 8X10 glossy print. > > I.e, they want the images taken from their collection to be > yet another profit > center -- just like the museum book store. Ouch! > > > ____________________________________________________________ > Free information on finding a medical malpractice lawyer to > file your case. > Click now. > http://thirdpartyoffers.netzero.net/TGL2231/fc/BLSrjnxaIwf40WVMrsZHhE7sR7ym8h > g77BGINwwqPC89dQ9XYWzbbFlu7vy/
