13 Feb
2013
13 Feb
'13
3:52 p.m.
On Tuesday 12 February 2013 19:13:02 Al Thompson wrote:
Of course not. I am speaking of fashion designs, not of the clothes made from
the designs.
Just like I would be talking about a song or a recording of a song and not a
CD of the recordings.
all the best,
drew
On 02/12/2013 06:40 PM, drew Roberts wrote:
Totally incorrect. I have made money selling ideas in the past. Nothing wrong
with that at all. A long time ago, I even ran some ads in the back of Popular
Science or something like that under IDEASHAVEVALUE.
Just look at the fashion industry where at least in some countries, they get
no copyright protection of their clothing designs and yet designers can still
make a living designing clothes.
They don't have the unnatural monopoly aand yet they still manage to makee a
living. This should be impossible right?
On Tuesday 12 February 2013 18:27:53 Al Thompson
wrote:
You can only believe that I have an "unnatural monopoly" over something
I created if you actually believe that everyone has equal claims on my
life/time/effort as I do. On 02/12/2013 11:31 AM, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
Only because the law gives you an unnatural monopoly. When I sold my work, I also delivered the
ownership of this work. When
I sold a graphic, it would have been unethically for me to still own
nearly all rights for the usage of this graphic.
Keep in mind that there are different meanings to "selling your work."
Take a song, as an example.
Let's say that I've recorded and released an album.
Let's say that some big-name pop star buys the album. He buys it for
$10. That gives him the right to listen to it. He can't record it
himself. I still own all the rights to the usage of the song. Somehow fashion designers manage to make what
seems to be decent money
designing original fashions even where they do not get copyright
protection for their fashion designs.
Is it that fashion designers are more astute when it comes to getting
paid for hteir creations? Are they more intelligent than songwriters?
You are falling into Kinsella's trap of believing that only hard goods
have value.