The possiblity exists only because artists have signed away their
rights to the likes of Corbis, Disney, National Geographic and Getty.
Those who didn't, like Galen Rowell, and Led Zeppelin, and myriad
other artists who figured it out, are examples to the rest of us of
why it's important not to.
They are all clear examples of why art should be not be free of copyright.
If something is free, then it has no value as measured by the
standard of current society. If it has no value, then why are
Corbis, Getty, National Geographic and Disney so eager to protect
their copyright and so eager to force the taking of it from the
spineless and gullible?
If you can express the value of your home and land in dollars, why
does it make sense to deny a similary valuation of a piece of art?
Art should be free? Artists should stay up 8 hours a day working in
Wal*Mart or at Toyota on the production line so they can spend 8
hours of their own time creating their art for others to use for free?
What a crock.
--
Emily L. Ferguson
mailto:elf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
508-563-6822
New England landscapes, wooden boats and races
http://www.landsedgephoto.com
http://e-and-s.instaproofs.com/
