Submitted by Wes Christensen, Feb 6, 2007 12:55

For those of us who have become frustrated and angry with the needless and draconian restrictions placed on artwork which should be in the public domain -- like "Starry Night" -- the uncontrolled subversion of this law that restricts the public from seeing and copying such imagery -- which doesn't BELONG to the museums, but are our shared cultural heritage -- gives me hope that art will rise above institutional and personal ownership and be returned to the public for which it was made. I am a painter and a teacher in an art school where the showing of slides and power point lectures is standard "fair use" method for exposing students to artwork of this and other art historical periods, and I have found it increasingly difficult to gain access to the educational use of such artwork in the past few years, even as scanning technology and digital cameras make these restrictive policies ludicrous. How do I teach my students about the need for reasonable copyright laws to protect their own work when they see museums restricting "photographs" of public domain art masterpieces that they happen to own at the moment. I do everything I can to get my work reproduced for such "fair use" as it only increases interest in my new work, which my gallery dealer hopes to sell today. The abuse of artists' work in "for hire" situations, where illustrators and cartoonists loose the rights to their labor to large companies who hold the rights for ever and ever -- how does this protect the rights of the artist? Or the ability of people like Michael Jackson to buy the rights to the Beatles songbook, or "Happy Birthday" for that matter, demanding royalties for performances of the creative work of others. No wonder the most recent copyright law is named after the late Sonny Bono, as they mean it when they sing, "I got you babe." Wes Christensen

Note: Comments are screened, and in some cases edited, before posting. We reserve the right to reject anything we find objectionable.