seems is *always* is in these threads. why do i
get the feeling that the sense of outrage when
such issues arise is directly proportional to the
amount of money the objector has invested in
their 'property'?
and it's been decided that it's New Jersey that
owns the Statue of Liberty, yes?
and here's a perhaps more apt question for you,
and we'll use very large monetary sums to make it
comfortable. suppose you purchase a Rembrandt,
to the tune of a million dollars. you are not
the work's creator, and you can assume that the
work had several previous owners before you
shelled out your life's savings for it.
now, do you think it reasonable to demand that
any portrayal of the image the painting
represents, in art books, on posters, postage
stamps, travel brochures, web sites etc., be
removed because you don't want your property 'on
display'? |
