|
Still, it does not change the fact that I need those texts for educational purposes, to tell me otherwise would be to tell me that you are more capable of educating me than myself, which is just absurd, then we simply extend that absurdity to copyright in general.
Also, if you subscribe to the theories of the new era, which I do, Then copying a work changes a work. Whether or not that change is significant is in the mind of the beholder, I see all change as significant.
Just a little sidenote, why is caching and serving of images by google not considered a copyright violation but copying and serving images by individuals is? It's especially interesting that google serves ads along with those images, whereas the individual serving images would not. Google is profiting off of the exploitation of another's art, their property. This is done for the public good? Who is the public, and who determines what is good?
|