Tracy R Reed wrote:
DJA wrote:
Apparently, you've never actually *made* museum quality photographic[1]
art (I have). That is, you've never
I'm sure you are right. But does the average joe care about this stuff?
He just wants something cool to put on his wall. And the average joe is
where the money is made on the copyright to Ansel Adams stuff.
The cool thing hanging on the wall is /not/ a photograph by Ansel Adams.
It's a photo-reproduction (a poor quality facsimile) of a photograph by
Ansel Adams. It mostly *looks* like an Ansel Adams photograph, but
it's not. Anyone who thinks it does has never seen a *real* Ansel Adams
photograph.
But you're right about Joe Sixpack not caring about whether it's
authentic or not. Hell, Joe Sixpack probably has no clue as to who Ansel
Adams was. He just likes the cool picture.
In any case, the original hypothesis was the *specific case* that
without copyright law, _Ansel Adams_ could never have made money. Having
had more than a bit of experience in photography as an art, and having
been an admirer of Adam's work (as well as a student of his processes),
I called "Bullshit" on that hypothesis.
My original objection was not so much that someone might or might not
attempt to copy an Adams photograph, but that doing so in such a way as
to economically affect Adams' income was, short of forgery (*which is
not the same as copying*), just not possible given the talent of the man
and the nature of the media. Ansel Adams was not dependent on the sale
of cheap posters depicting his work. On the contrary, those selling
cheap posters are dependent on the artists who produce the originals.
Just like
the average person can't really tell the difference between an LV
handbag and a fake so they buy the fakes which is why LV is trying to
shut down the fakes.
Again, that's not the same thing. A poster of an Ansel Adams photograph
is not sold as being an original. A fake LV (whatever that is) handbag
being sold as an original is a counterfeit, a forgery, a fake. The
person selling the knockoff will not be charged with copyright
violations, they will be charged with what amounts to forgery, i.e. the
attempt to claim someone else's work as their own. It's a form of
identity theft.
--
Best Regards,
~DJA.
--
[email protected]
http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-list
