> I see two very contradictory points in your threads, Lee.
> One is that artists need to stand up for themselves and know
> their worth and quit being doormats.
> The other is they shouldn't have copyright laws and legal
> protection, subsidies, unionpay scales, etc.
> ...just "make it happen" somehow.
They seem contradictory, and I probably am being less clear
than I could be. My only issue is with copyright: the idea
that ideas are "ownable". I oppose that for ethical reasons,
and I think humanity as a whole suffers from the shackles
put on our collective minds by this restriction on the free
flow of information of all kinds.
Ethics aside, I also argue that pragmatically copyright does
not serve artists as it is supposed to--it serves publishers,
and to some extent mediocre artists; good artists could make
good livings without it. I think that good artists are making
a mistake to think that they need copyright to earn a living.
Of course I oppose all subsidies of any kind. I don't know
where you get any idea about unions; they're a great capitalist
invention I support fully.
-- Lee Daniel Crocker <email@example.com> <http://www.piclab.com/lee/> "All inventions or works of authorship original to me, herein and past, are placed irrevocably in the public domain, and may be used or modified for any purpose, without permission, attribution, or notification."--LDC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Oct 02 2000 - 17:34:26 MDT