Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2001/06/17
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]I have a problem with the last part of that sentence. Just in Paris, Eiffel tower, Notre Dame, many people visit these places because of the architectural statement they make. Would people queue to go up the Eiffel tower if it were a 10 metre high plain brick building? If you believe that the answer is no, then surely you accept that the building's appearance has an effect on its revenue generating potential. Steve - -----Original Message----- From: owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us [mailto:owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us]On Behalf Of Mxsmanic Sent: 17 June 2001 10:04 To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us Subject: Re: [Leica] Re: Copyright questions <big snip> For example, asserting copyright on a sculpture is much easier to understand than asserting it on a building; the creativity of the sculpture is of the essence of its interest and utility (and therefore of its revenue-generating potential and overall worth), whereas the creativity of a building or car's appearance has little effect on its utility and revenue-generating potential.