XPost: rec.arts.tv, rec.arts.sf.tv   
   From: jimgysin@geemail.com   
      
   James Sidbury sent the following on 10/28/2009 8:46 PM:   
   > In article ,   
   >  Jim Gysin  wrote:   
   >   
   >> The artist is creating a special work of art.  The artist gets to define   
   >> the terms of access to that art.   
   >   
   > But if the artist copyrights the work then he is explicitly agreeing to   
   > whatever copyright law says.  If you want total control to the access of   
   > your work then you should not copyright it but instead make whatever   
   > deals you want with the people that you want to deal with.   
      
   I was unaware that the courts would accept or uphold agreements that   
   violated existing Constitutional law.  For example, if I could make   
   whatever deal I want with, say, a family selling me their house, and one   
   of the terms of that deal was that they kill an annoying neighbor   
   (another detour from what the Constitution allows) before moving out,   
   wouldn't the courts have a problem with that?  Is copyright law   
   different from laws against murder and the like?   
      
   --   
   Jim Gysin   
   Waukesha, WI   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)