[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]

Re: The Knight analogy

Starting with a strawman and expanding for pages.... nice.

You were not the first to use "your" pose. In your example you do not
factor that in. And even then: Knight would not have had any copyright
on the "Knight look". Especially not if he wrote scientific papers on
how to produce these drawings, including a "how-to" guide, and another
long and preachy discussion in a self-congratulatory book edited by

Sorry, it is a tad late to say, 24 years later, that you meant
something entirely different then what you actually wrote. Want a
"Paleontological restoration is a discipline as valuable to the field
[of paleontology] as its other branches. At their best, when rendered
with daring and boldness, restorations are also a form of art."

I guess you did answer our question how your restorations are not
scientific data, despite being published in scientific venues, you
answered it some 24 years ago: they ARE scientific data - so why whine
now when people treat them as such?

Oh, and wasn't is you, in the intro to the SciAm book on dinosaurs
(ed. GS Paul  - talk about self-promotion!) who wrote how inspired you
were by Bakker's drawings????

And finally: you have failed to answer the posed questions directly.
Instead, if you seem to answer anything, you always do it obliquely,
as you do here. A poor man's way of dodging the question.

Why do you think your "body of work" is different (those parts
published in the scientific literature) from the work of other
scientists? Because you WANT to earn money with it? has your 401k
belly-flopped or what is the reason for your sudden change of mind?

Interestingly, you now talk about professional courtesy. Well, that's
an entirely different matter. If you hadn't touted the supposed
accuracy of your drawings so much, if you hadn't directly prompted
others to follow your example, written a how-to guide, called your
restorations "scientific", and been extremely un-courteous all over
all public venues - then I would agree that others should show
"professional courtesy". In fact, many people have simply taken you at
your published word - now you throw them into the same pot as those
few who really try to rip you off. Quite mixing the two groups up,
come to realize that you really have a lot of support here for your
valid points. And do drop the two really ridiculous demands: the one
that you retain copyright for stuff you signed copyright for off to
others, and the demand that people should not use "your" pose.

Heinrich Mallison

On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 4:42 AM,  <GSP1954@aol.com> wrote:
> Let’s do a little historical thought analogy here.
> Some have claimed that it is not right for me to civilly insist (see my 3/3
> posting) that others not use my regular side view skeleton and life pose.
> Not all mind you, a number have kindly agreed with the request.
> Say good old Charles Knight had adopted a standard pose for a bunch of side
> views -- skeletons and lifes -- that he used over the many years. It became
> known as the Knight Look that many of us grew up on and remain widely
> beloved (albeit not accurate by modern standards but that’s another issue). 
> Say
> one or more artists started using the same pose. And say this occurrence
> seriously cut into his income.
> The question to those who oppose my protecting my body of work is as
> follows. Would you contend that it was tough luck for Charles? That when a
> paleoartist does something so repetitively that it becomes his or her 
> standard or
> popular brand that the very act of doing so makes it fair game for all else
> to use?
> The next question to those who have been after me is as follows. Say
> eventually after prodding by others who also saw the problem Knight 
> reluctantly
> posted a notice saying it was impairing his income and insisted that as a
> professional courtesy that others don’t use the pose and thank you for
> cooperating. Would you condemn his request?
> If Knight were still alive today would you respond to his politely worded
> statement on the list – say it was worded much the same as mine -- by telling
> him to stop trying to protect his body of work?
> And if you think it would have been fine for the late great Knight to have
> taken action to protect himself in this manner, then why are you critical of
> me for doing so?
> If you are being inconsistent then there is a problem concerning your
> attitude to my request. Actually it is not just me, because had any 
> paleoartist
> done something similar they would have probably caught similar flak. This
> indicates a level of disrespect of current paleoartists.
> If you are being consistent by saying that no artist can do what is
> described above then it is not undermining me or living paleoartists per se, 
> but
> you are basically saying that it is improper for artists to invoke
> professional courtesy to better protect their body of work.
> I am going to make a guess that if the above had happened back in days of
> yore then it would be widely acknowledged that of course it was fine for
> Knight to issue his notice. If you agree, and if you now realize that any
> paleoartist of any period including this one can do the same, please let us 
> know.
> G Paul
> </HTML>