Thanks to Michael and Nikki for clearing
up my autumnal pickle. It was intended to
get a clarification and I'm grateful that
the horse has spoken forth.
I ought to state, for the record, that
copyright is not a personal fetish. In
point of fact a fair proportion of what
i have published is explicitly identified
as being 'anti-copyright'. It's through
producing differing (often subtle) 'versions'
of works for differing formats and media
that I render what i do specific to context.
I know that invokes other issues, for example
of 'translation'.
As i wrote to Ric backchannel, Jo had said that
she did sing (sign) permissions in return for
agreed payment. Her worry was, to paraphrase
Ric's reply (should i have requested his
permission), whether she's meet nicer people
in the bank or in the freezer.
My advice to Jo was 'write a slightly
different version'. Of course that begins to
ask awkward questions about 'closure' and
'authentic utterance' too.
This semi-public e-space renders such questions
plus fort.
thanks again
love and love
cris
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|