Subject: Re: Hmmmmm
From: Alexandra Hettergott (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Sun May 23 1999 - 08:24:00 EDT
Dennis Bathory-Kitsz wrote :
>And what is the purpose of property? It's only by a kind of almost absurd
>social consensus that infinitely replicable expressed ideas can be
>construed as "property". Property serves a profit purpose, a reference
>purpose, and an ego purpose. Where the first two aren't met, that only
>leaves the last. (And with sampling, almost none are served by defending
>'ownership' of intangible fragments that were never 'possessed' to start
>with -- they're clones, replications.) That the law defines it doesn't make
>Ironically, your childhood-learned politeness actually assists that
>acquisitive process and helps validate the legal silliness.
>I prefer the opposite assumption: Use what you like until someone says
>please don't. The legal-economic partnership will do both with impunity
>anyway. (Ultimately, I still believe it's only a difference of power.)
Sagacious statement, yet what about the _"ethical"_ point of view, and can a sense of
(self)responsibility really be assumed as a common attitude ? And where does the
liberty (in integrating a given something in a new context) end ?
An old yet always new story (as Harry Heine said...), yet what about the apparent
dialectics in the postmodern position, could a glorification of murder or war or
naziism _really_ be included (and justified) in an art context today ?
1, avenue des Gobelins
Tél/fax: +33-(0)1-43 31 41 27
... la noche,
... sombra y espacio, tierra
algo que corre y cae
y pasa ...
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b27 : Wed Jun 11 2003 - 13:08:58 EDT