On 8/31/07, Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On 8/31/07, K P <kpbotany(a)gmail.com> wrote:
I don't follow?
The photographer only turned some knobs and actuated the shutter.
Other people and forces created the world. The photographer is but a
infinitesimal part of what it really took to make any image of our
world.
Yet because of the properties of our law the photographer or those he
designates are the only ones with standing to demand credit under
copyright.
Those who would complain about trivial preferences on credit would do
well to remember they did not create this world, they likely did not
invent their art, and their labors are infinitesimal compared to all
the work by man and nature which came before them. By comparison with
these great things an individual passage of text or a photograph is
tiny achievement, and without them these works would not be remotely
possible. We all stand on the shoulders of giants...
Its something of a tangent for our discussion, but it's interesting
food for thought. Under these sort of absolute terms the authors of
our text and of our images both contribute similar tiny amounts to
the wealth of our world. We should be appreciative and respectful,
but there is no sense in letting it get out of hand.
Well, that's a unique take on it. But, sorry, no, just arming an army
of monkeys or even chimpanzees trained to point and shoot isn't going
to create art that's going to stop people from forking over hundreds
of dollars for little itty bitty prints by me of the things they see
every day and could shoot themselves.
But that is the original reason I put many of my nature prints in the
public domain: I didn't create the world I shoot. On the other hand,
when I donate my prints to a natural history museum, including the
rights to reproduce them, 100% of mine are accepted, and I'm asked for
more, while the overall acceptance rate for images is well under 10%.
Again, all those folks just turning knobs and actuating shutters that
someone else invented didn't create art worth publishing, or even
worth being kept for free, no matter how much you consider the act of
taking a picture to be nothing more than using an invention by someone
else.
Picasso didn't invent the paintbrush or canvas, but try telling Spain
how little their painting is worth, in light of the fact that he's not
the inventor of his tools, and maybe they'll send it to you for the
cost of the freight.
Being appreciative and respectful doesn't mean treating all things as
equal when they're not--this, in fact, artificially diminishes or
elevates things to what they are not, which is disrespectful.
KP