On 31/10/11 12:50, Juha Huuskonen wrote:
> 3 - Artists might use copyleft in the hope that it's a better way to
> protect their work from commercial exploitation (and most of them have
> nothing to loose since they are not generating income via copyrights
Copyleft isn't anti-commercial, it protects an individual's ability to
be paid for creating or distributing work. But you're right that artists
don't generate income from copyright. It's a category error to suggest
otherwise. Those lawyers and photograph librarians who are doing so are
misguided at best.
Copyleft feels right to some artists because it embodies the freedom of
representation and of iconography that is vital to developing as an
artist. To others it solves problems of distribution or completion or
context. And to others it's just zeitgeisty.