From: Jorge Amaro (email suppressed)
Date: Wed Jun 11 2008 - 00:53:25 PDT
Could Bruce Conner made A Movie having that in mind? Could dozens of
found footage film makers have done anything at all? The concept of
property is somehow confusing for me. The idea of nullify the found
footage films I love so much over a concept of property is weird. And
no one will think that a videotaped event from some museum or
screening will substitute the film, and i think what matters is that
people see the work, isnt it for that reason people make them in the
first place? If they made it over an idea of property they could close
it in drawer and throw away key, that alone is the only option if you
dont want to see copies of your work.
2008/6/11 James Cole <email suppressed>:
>> That's like saying a
>> postcard of the Mona Lisa is the intellectual property of Leonardo.
> Is that really such an absurd idea? I mean, it seems pretty clear
> that, were Leonardo alive, it would be his property. Certainly you
> can't be in favor of the postcard manufacturer being able to make
> profits off of the Mona Lisa while Da Vinci has no say whatsoever.
> If it wasn't ubuweb that was using it (an organization which is
> ostensibly in favor of avant-garde film), would people really be so
> allowing? If ubu can show a clip recorded off of a monitor, then can
> the US Army use the same clip in recruiting videos? Can McDonalds use
> it to sell burgers?
> For info on FrameWorks, contact Pip Chodorov at <email suppressed>.
For info on FrameWorks, contact Pip Chodorov at <email suppressed>.