More Copyright Madness
Few things get me as irate as copyright, and it's misuse.I recently looked into getting this image:
For use by Mass Citizens, as a nice pro-natal, pro-child image. Julia Cameron took the picture, more than 130 years ago (she died in 1879). The copyright has, thus, long since expired. However the actual photograph has been donated to the Eastman House museum and they, of course, restrict access to it and charge hundreds for a one-time use of the real image. Now, of course, libertarians will say that this is only fitting because they are storing the images and have real bills to pay. But what am I really paying for? The financial interest in the picture has long since passed. The author of the work has lost her financial interest in the work, but I'm paying because this museum through a combination of a legal regime of copyright plus their ability to enforce its scarcity, constricting supply. There's no reason I need to pay this amount. There's no reason that the museum couldn't set up a google picasa account and host the images there, and loose themselves of the storage costs. They have an asset and they're milking it for all its worth, even though these are wonderful, cultural treasures.
Okay okay, sure, they're a business, they should be allowed to do this. I understand that, that doesn't change the fact it pisses me off. But that they're ostensibly a museum, but one that restricts access to their holdings demonstrates, to me at least, a degree of hypocrisy that ought to be recognized. Information is meant to be free, and people should not be denied their ability to see these cultural treasures. It would be better were these corporations to change their models to either produce new content, or showcase the existing content in a different way, rather than simply bilking fellow non-profits for reproduction rights to a photograph that is over a century old.
Labels: copyright, legal, photos
posted by . @ 11:28 AM
1 Comments
Links to this post
