Recent thread on Wood Central brought up an old topic that, perhaps, deserves a bit more treatment to keep it current. Original post had to do with demos and "how to" instruction by Binh Pho where/how a turner uses the Internet to find and then print an image which is then transferred to a turning for carving, piercing, or other processing.
I, kill-joy that I am, commented that such activity could well subject a turner to suit by the original artist under the copyright laws, usually, but not exclusively, if the turner sells their work.
Given that artists have been ripping each other off for 30,000+ years (all to the benefit of Art as an exchange of ideas), and in light of how humans have progressed from roaming bands of hairy knuckle-walkers into the multifaceted hyperlitigous culture we all now enjoy (especially the people like me [attorneys] who make their living in the judicial system), and given that those clay-spinners have done most every conceivable shape and form many times over the past 30 millenia, where and how should we wood (and stone?) turners draw the line between imitation and emulation, flattery and fraud?
Mark Mandell
I, kill-joy that I am, commented that such activity could well subject a turner to suit by the original artist under the copyright laws, usually, but not exclusively, if the turner sells their work.
Given that artists have been ripping each other off for 30,000+ years (all to the benefit of Art as an exchange of ideas), and in light of how humans have progressed from roaming bands of hairy knuckle-walkers into the multifaceted hyperlitigous culture we all now enjoy (especially the people like me [attorneys] who make their living in the judicial system), and given that those clay-spinners have done most every conceivable shape and form many times over the past 30 millenia, where and how should we wood (and stone?) turners draw the line between imitation and emulation, flattery and fraud?
Mark Mandell