Re: [ARSCLIST] Public's rights....was offlist archival question from ARSC list member

[George Brock-Nannestad <pattac@xxxxxxxx>]

From: Patent Tactics, George Brock-Nannestad

Karl Miller wrote (and fortunately abbreviated my previous mail):

> George Brock-Nannestad <pattac@xxxxxxxx> wrote:    ----- Just as if a
> wealthy person had bought 
> a painting but put it in his private vault. 
>    
>   I have also wondered about this as well. Also, the owner of the art work
> has the right to destroy it if he or she chooses to do.

----- well, is that not the ultimate infringement of the moral right of the 
artits?

>    
>   Governments can keep buildings from being destroyed...In the US they can
> be marked as being a bit of history that needs to remain in the public
> trust. I wonder then what might be the basis, from the perspective of the
> law,  that supports such action...and why we do not carry those notions to
> other forms of human expression...or do we?

----- "remain" means that it once was in the public domain, but not ephemeral 
like a performance, and the "right to know" must apply, and governments acts 
to the common good. So, obviously they ought to be able to do the same for 
other forms of human expression. I think that we are in agreement!


Kind regards,


George