wwp@yahoogroups.com:
Re: ZKM globorama hassle
Josh 2008-Jun-05 14:05:00
--- In #removed#, Kathy Wheeler <kathyw@...> wrote:
>
> You must agree that the principle of copyright is important?
Yes I agree.
> Then regardless of who abuses it and why, it's wrong.
But your conclusion is b/w. There is a 'grey-zone'. Keep in mind, that
Bernd Lintemann at ZKM developed and raised an experimental arts
project. Without knowing him personally, I guess in the beginning
he/they thought 'what material can we use for testing/presenting'? And
then it is quite an honour, when they think about the WWP.
> Unauthorised cropping of a spherical pano to a thin strip is abhorent
> to many WWP contributors who consider the integrity of the entire
> pano, and it's context in the WWP to be of great importance.
Come on - is this really so bad? The globorama is by construction a
thin cylindrical screen and no dome. In 90 percent of the pictures
there is not enough relevant information, but only sky above or grass
below ... You can start developing a spherical projection room, go on
- but be aware, using wwp panos for testing is expensive! ;-)
> If you support the principle of copyright at all, then you must
> understand that to ignore the actions of people like ZKM is
> undermining that principle. Their past and proven abuse of copyright
> must be resolved.
Yes I agree - but I would accept an apologize and write no invoices.
>
> That is not to say that once that sorry chapter is resolved that we
> cannot potentially work with them.
Do you really think, they will want to work with people who sent
invoices or went to court?
Again - what I want to tell you all: there is a great difference in
how pictures are used! If a multinational company steals your artwork
for a big campaign that costs millions, then go to court and fight for
your rights!
ZKM is school and museum. They don't have endless budgets. Lintemann
does a lot to develop virtual reality. Don, Markus & Co - we all - do
a lot to develop virtual reality. We are sitting in the same boat. I
can't believe we are fighting each other.
ZKM has had and has no realistic chance to contact each individual
panographer for THIS kind of project: it is an interactive way for the
observer to choose what pano he/she likes to watch. Like at the WWP
site. ZKM can't even control how often a pano is brought up and how
long it is watched.
I believe this is quite an important discussion also about the future
of WWP. Any interested party or potential buyer should have an easy
way to contact one, some or ALL panographers. And we panographers
should have the possibility to agree/disagree.
Most participants in this discussion here claim only the mistake of
ZKM using their panos - and ignore any positve benefit. This is sad.
Cheers
Josh