| To Tina Manley: I praise your timely inclusion of the Bernie Convention document, which, quite frankly was and in most cases where artists are concerned, never introduced. Thank you. I know that I am not the only one who was given the US Governments Law on Copyright (which I quoted along with others) as the basic rule of law concerning the ownership of photographic property - that which one has creatively made. There has been an awareness of the longevity of a copyright and what can be copyrighted, plus a potential misnomer that "your negative is your copyright." If this is partly or completely true I would appreciate knowing this. As for the other 24+ pages I have printed them off and will now include them in my actual paper files when issues of intellectual property v copy written property are concerned. Perhaps this is a confusion that many are struggling with and that is the present challenge to an idea being an individual's personal property or intellectual property. But I shall be leaving this and the new age of computer mishaps in the hands of Copyright Lawyers and the US Court System. Otherwise what is of greater importance in that of ethical and moral values entering into the copyright issue. Ethical behavior and moral behavior in this country has seen an all time low and this is what must be challenged and then adhered to. It is basically the absence of the "handshake contract" style of ethics which has for many years and for many people been one of both character and of legal agreement. One's word is seldom one of trustworthiness; this is to be lamented but needs cultural and moral repairing if anything aspect of intellectual property rights as pertains to ideas, is to be solved. On Jan 14, 2007, at 12:51 PM, Tina Manley wrote: At 03:28 PM 1/14/2007, you wrote: |
