On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 12:30 PM, <adigg...@comcast.net> wrote: > > Scott Cramer wrote: > > "While the article has some unnecessary snark, it's not unreasonable to > expect this column/section to take the stance it does...and reasonable > people can certainly disagree about the state of copyright, Fair Use, > and artistic appropriation/remix/etc/ without loving origami any less.
Just to be clear, I (Chris Lott) said this. > > I agree that the article was a touch snarky and that Ms. Morris' position > was reasonable and her confusion is probably born of the fact that painters > play with each other's images all the time, but I must side more closely with > Lang. A crease pattern wether intentional or not, is essentail to the creation > of a model and it is possible if one enjoys puzzles (or has masochistic > tendencies) > to fold a model from a crease pattern. Tom Sullivan I'm guessing this is probably not a good forum for this to turn into a debate, so I'll just note without detail that I don't think Morris was confused at all... and I don't think the intentionality of the pattern or its essential-ness to the model from which it is derived is relevant. I can understand how you see things differently, though! c -- Chris Lott <ch...@chrislott.org>
