Re:Photographer wins 'monkey selfie' legal fight
by int_19h on Tuesday September 12, 2017 @06:38AM
(#15226191)
Well, copyright is a 17th century legal concept, so I don't see why "extremely provincial and 19th century view" is necessarily wrong?
Artists are welcome to do all kinds of things, such as "given creative control to random elements and processes". But they shouldn't be surprised if copyright law doesn't fully apply to the result.
Re:Photographer wins 'monkey selfie' legal fight
by coldtea on Tuesday September 12, 2017 @01:43PM
(#15229439)
>Well, copyright is a 17th century legal concept, so I don't see why "extremely provincial and 19th century view" is necessarily wrong?
Because it was superseded by 20th and 21st century ones?
That's extremely provincial and 19th century view of the matter.
In modern art all kinds of artists including photographers give creative control to random elements and processes.
It's the setup they built and the creative concept behind it that defines their artwork, not the details like "composition/timing" which they can leave to chance, others, etc. (Yes, in some works even "composition" and "subject matter captured" can be detail left to chance -- this is often the case in e.g. generational music and painting, where the artist just sets up the general framework).