On Wed, 7 Jul 1999, GASK wrote:
>>->As a 'theory' outlaw, i hold no fears about being sued in practice. i
>>->believe i'm using other people's property when i sample, if they ask for
>it
>>->back, they have every right to do so.
>>
>>what a spineless and confused creature. You evidently don't care much for
>>your own art.
>>
>
>Yeah, because i don't fucking care if i break the law or not, then i'm
>obviously spineless, and because i have the temerity to come on to yr
>cosy list where everyone agrees with each other and state a slightly
>different opinion, then i'm obviously very confused.
Well, sorry if i've offended you, but the point i was trying to make is
that if you're an artist, and you really don't care that the law says that
practicing your art the way you're practicing it is wrong, in fact says
that if it decides to it can DESTROY your art and fine you and maybe put
you in jail, then, well, that just seems really contradictory and
pointless and weak. To not care about what you do to the extent that
you agree with those who would prevent you from doing it (stating that
copyright law is okay the way it is), that's just a waste. (that's where
spineless and confused came from.)
As for "slightly different opinion"... huh? hello? I would venture to say
that yours is a RADICALLY different opinion than the prevailing one here.
Which is not to say you can't voice it, but you've got to expect to get
some contrary replies. And frankly I don't have much patience for
arguing with someone who hasnt thought out the rational consequences of
their statements.
just to make the climate even more painfully clear:
1. I think it's safe to assume that everyone on this list is on it
because in some way they are interested in appropriation, recycled
culture, etc., whatever you want to call it.
2. Further, although there are many reasons why one might be interested,
For the most part, judging from prior discussion, the main ones boil
down to one or more of the following:
a) the person is a "fan"
b) the person is a practioner themselves
c) the person is studying the subject (as a scholar or whatnot)
(there may be others, like lawyers from Sony collecting evidence against
us all, but they have not made themselves known. I tend to not count
lurkers.)
3. For at least the first 2 cases and probably the third, the list member
would logically be favorably inclined toward THE CONTINUED EXISTENCE AND
CREATION of this kind of cultural work.
4. Current copyright law is clearly opposed to this type of cultural
work.
5. Therefore most people on this list, it is reasonable to assume, would
favor changes to copyright law, if not society's overall attitude toward
intellectual property.
Maybe, GASK, I misunderstand your position. If so, I invite you to
elaborate.
smh
Steev Hise
steevATdetritus.net
-----------------------------------------------------------------
"Will society be any worse off, if this CGI script goes unwritten?"
-Po Bronson, Wired
-----------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------
Rumori, the Detritus.net Discussion List
to unsubscribe, send mail to majordomoATdetritus.net
with "unsubscribe rumori" in the message body.
----------------------------------------------------
Rumori list archives & other information are at
http://detritus.net/contact/rumori
----------------------------------------------------
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
N© Detritus.net. Sharerights extended to all.