From: Robkin, Eugene (erobkin@uwc.edu)
Date: 03/06/01-08:53:37 AM Z
Sandy
You are confusing cutting out a picture from a source owned by someone else
with cutting out a picture from a magazine owned by yourself. Judy did not
say she was going into the NY Public Library to razor out pages from the
collection. I'd agree with you there that it would be a crime worthy of
being torn apart by wild beasts.
The fact that someone cut out a wonderful image from an old Camera Work but
somehow that particular magazine wound up in your possession because you
bought it for a buck at a local thrift shop may be terribly disapointing but
it hardly counts as any sort of crime.
A contemorary magazine you buy is by definition ephemeral. Cut it up or
throw it out is all the same. Just because libraries maintain back issues
or someone finds it a valuable collectable at the time or 30 years later is
interesting to many and a source of revenue to some but not much else.
All Judy implied was that she cuts up the magazines she buys. So what?
Gene Robkin
-----Original Message-----
From: Sandy King
To: alt-photo-process-l@sask.usask.ca
Sent: 3/6/01 11:57 AM
Subject: Re: Copyright Law Violation - was Re: book
Judy Seigel wrote:
>
>I myself tear pages out of art magazines to keep as reference. That's
what
>they're for.
Judy,
I think that is called vandalism (and the accumulated loss is great),
putting aside other self-serving pronouncemnts. Unfortunately, not hard
to
find the manifestation of your attidude in lots of vintage photography
magazines.
Sandy
Sandy
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : 04/02/01-09:55:24 AM Z CST