Then I am silly.To say the law is irrelevant and your opinion is what counts is silly.
Because if the law really says "You must go out and take other peoples works against their will" - then I deem that specific law to be destructive, irrelevant and should be ignored. At least when it comes to my own actions. Then you can call me silly and criminal as much you want - I will still not steal material!
Yes. You are misquoting me, but still, I'm cutting myself off from a lot of material. However, I'm creating an awful lot of material to compensate. Most of it is unfortunately crap - but I'm slowly improving :)If your logic requires you to ask permission of a creator to perform a routine they've published, you are cutting yourself off from an awful lot of material.
Not much of a problem really. During the last 5-6 years there has only been two unpublished routines I covet - Harbin's routine and a piece by Max Maven. But I will survive without them.
I don't have a Chop Cup. I had one, but I got rid of it when I heard that Wheatley got ripped off. Although, I consider the cup's function to be more of a general tool than an artwork - so if I had created a handling that was a huge improvement to the standard handling, I would probably have kept it. But since I had not improved on it, I got rid of it.
My friend Tommy Wonder died last year. I deeply admired his act. But I wouldn't dream of taking his material just because he is dead - perhaps he gave it to one of his other friends? I can not just assume that it is up for grabs without doing thourogh research. I'd have to talk with his brother, with Veronica Ross, Dick Koornwinder and others before being able to do any conclusions.
Well - if it is published, I take it for granted that I can perform it if I own the book or magazine. I take it for granted that the author has cleared everything. I do read reviews so if there are transgressions in books, I avoid them.what you fail to understand is that you may not even be asking the right person if you see something published and want to perform it.
Pretty straightforward.
This is different though - this is an unpublished piece. And it is so brilliant that I can't improve on it (that would be one way otherwise - take the clip as inspiration and make something new out of it). Not only that - after seeing Harbin's performance, I've stopped to do the simple tear I used to do, because it was crap in comparison.
Hmm.. had I not been this naive, I think I could read in quite a lot here. Like.. perhaps you still want to produce that oversized trade paper back of the Harbin book? The more people takes from Harbin without permission, the easier it will be to argue that the book is in public domain. Even as such, a reprint would give a hefty profit... Good thing I'm too naive to think like that ;)The point being, because they did nothing to protect their property, it is possible to argue that the Harbin book is in the public domain