Re: [-empyre-] Re: copyright

["Melinda Rackham" <melinda@unsw.edu.au>]

patrick wrote:
> BTW, I'm very amused at one thing:
> In the late 90's, there was an almost idyllic sense of comaraderie, but
with
> the introduction of recognition (read: fame/fortune), just watch the fur
> fly.
>
> It's actually a little embarrassing.

i agree to an extent , but i think also at that time there  was a
recognition that we were here for the long haul and what you can
idelaistically maintain for maybe 4-5 years on cracked software and sourcing
other peoples equipment , or producing a new media magazine on a shoestring
etc etc, all  without much cost or any payment  is a ridiculous ask over a
life time unless you are a buddist monk/nun totally supported by your
community, or  have independent wealth and actually really are a net artist
for a hobby..

 i dont work in academia ( im just doing the phd cause i want people to
trust me and call me doctor  ;) so i have no other income sources eccept for
my pracice- and i know a lot of artists and ill include writers, curators,
producers etc who choose not to have kids, own property ,  dont have
superannuation or health planns, or any of the other financial things that
anyone working in any other profession would expect to have after reaching a
level of expertize and recognition in thier field.

john wrote:
as far as my "estate" i could not care less, i'll be dead and i do not
>>>intend to have heirs, at least none that i know of, yuk yuk.
>>>
>>yeah me neither.., thats why i want it now!!!
>
>good point, though i assume you would know if you had any heirs :)

um what with cloning and embryo research there may be some of my fingernail
clippings growing into a Mini-Mel in a lab somewhere in brazil. perhps i
should copyrite myself.... insert a photoshop watermark (did anyone anywhere
ever use that "feature" ???) into my protein strings..

m