Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!uwm.edu!moocow!cc!ccjs From: CCJS@cc.nu.oz (James Smith) Newsgroups: rec.music.gaffa Subject: An apology Message-ID: <9459@cc.nu.oz> Date: 25 Sep 89 15:02:44 GMT Sender: daemon@bloom-beacon.MIT.EDU Reply-To: Love-Hounds@GAFFA.MIT.EDU Organization: University of Newcastle Lines: 25 Approved: love-hounds@eddie.mit.edu Really-From: James SmithLast night while looking over some old postings I had a chance to reread a message on the morality issue I posted a while back. In it I said that an author does not own the text of a book he writes or a scientist a machine he invents. This amounts to an advocation of piracy. Lazlo flamed me over it and I flamed him back. Lazlo, I apologise. I'm an idiot. You were right to say such an attitude is morally corrupt: it is. What I was trying to say is that I regard a piece of artwork as akin to a scientific discovery. If I discover a process for turning lead into gold, I have the moral right to make money from that process and to stop others from doing so. But I don't own the process, nor do I have the moral right to suppress it. I feel art falls into the same category. You probably don't agree with this; fair enough. But I hope you can understand it. Jim -- James Smith, Computing Centre, University of Newcastle, ccjs@cc.nu.oz.au "Who's for dinner? Shall we draw lots, boys?" -- _Asterix at the Olympic Games_