On Tue, May 20, 2003 at 04:08:33PM -0700, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote: > What about Marcel Duchamp? Dammit, stop ignoring the question! For > Duchamp, "violating" the Mona Lisa was an integral part of the > artistic statement being made. Does that not count? Address the > case. So far it merely looks like you think that it's ok, except when > it isn't, and you can't or won't say which.
Perhaps many Europeans understood droit d'auteur as one U.S. Supreme
Court justice famously understood pornograhy:
"I can't define it, but I know it when I see it."
Three cheers for non-objective law.
--
G. Branden Robinson | A celibate clergy is an especially
Debian GNU/Linux | good idea, because it tends to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | suppress any hereditary propensity
http://people.debian.org/~branden/ | toward fanaticism. -- Carl Sagan
pgpbLfALNJXH4.pgp
Description: PGP signature
