Mark Peters Posted May 23, 2015 Report Posted May 23, 2015 You realize the cave painting lawsuit article is satire right? Even modern copyright expires and since copyright is a concept based on the creation of a work pray tell how a work created before the legal concept of copyright existed could possible even enter the discussion. Quote
Members Grey Drakkon Posted May 26, 2015 Members Report Posted May 26, 2015 And though the original artists are long dead, yes, litigation can never-the-less attach itself to the ancient cave images. http://questioncopyright.org/lascaux_descendents_recovering_royalties "Featherstonehaugh added that the families would be seeking additional compensatory damages from the estate of Georgia O'Keeffe, whose paintings of deer skulls and antlers from the American Southwest were "clearly derivative, and were made entirely without permission," in the lawyer's words." That...Is a joke. The whole article is a joke. Quote "Everyone with telekinesis, raise my hand!" -Repairman Jack
Members 25b Posted May 26, 2015 Members Report Posted May 26, 2015 That...Is a joke. The whole article is a joke. I really, honestly don't understand how someone could read that link and NOT come to the conclusion that it's satire...makes you wonder... Quote
Members Grey Drakkon Posted May 26, 2015 Members Report Posted May 26, 2015 Fair use/copyright came up recently in regards to patterns for leatherworking, I found http://library.dts.edu/Pages/RM/Helps/copyright.shtml as a pretty clear-cut explanation on what is fair use now. Quote "Everyone with telekinesis, raise my hand!" -Repairman Jack
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.