Origami Piracy

[Joseph Wu]

dear joe did you read what you've written?
...

I was wondering the same thing after reading your last post in this thread.

[araknoid]

oh then you actually took the time, wow.

[Joseph Wu]

oh then you actually took the time, wow.

Yes, and I'm still unsure what exactly you are talking about or who exactly you are talking to. If some of those points were directed at me, you've got some misconceptions about me.

[origamimasterjared]

I think you're confusing Joseph Wu with Joe White...

[Ondrej.Cibulka]

Yes, I am sure about that.

[araknoid]

look mates, my points were about money, what is art and the role of the artist, and the nature of ideas.
the jolly roger is about having free access to the whole info library.
my disgust comes along with patronizing.
and, to be more precise:
in verbal matters the verb to have is often a clever and devilish hiding place to avoid the verb to be.
we all love origami here i suppose and no one would even think about harming anybody.
but i don't like to be a policeman, no.
and regarding the last post i find it so 18th century style to say "oh, those poor, if at least they knew how to behave"...

hope to be clear now.

[malachi]

I've said it many times, and so have others, but in no other visual art are the artists expected to produce instructions for how to duplicate their work.

Basket weaving.

[Joe the white]

I think you're confusing Joseph Wu with Joe White...

I think I'll go by Chuck from now on.

Basket weaving is yet another thing the general public would refer to as a craft. It puzzles me though, the modern concept of art is more of an impractical craft than its true definition. In that case, origami is mostly representational and more art, and basket weaving has more practical uses and is more craft. Its a moot argument anyway, analogies aren't always perfect :S.

[pitboss]

It puzzles me though, the modern concept of art is more of an impractical craft than its true definition. In that case, origami is mostly representational and more art, and basket weaving has more practical uses and is more craft.

Considering some of the things that pass for "art" nowadays...Diaz's Serpentario is far more artistic than a bunch of pipes with orange fabric hanging off them...

[Theiresias]

Dear Joseph Wu,

I specifically registerd to reply to your message for it left me with a bad feeling.

Diagrams have LARGELY contributetd to the popularity of origami.

We have a saying in Germany:

"Nachahmung ist die höchste Form der Anerkennung."

It means that emulation is the utmost expression of esteem.

A model is still your composition even if you don't fold it yourself.

Take any pianist-composer of the twentieth century, e.g. Sergej Rachmaninov. Did he keep his scores secret so that only he could play them? NO. Did he receive credit even if someone else played them? YES. (And not many could play his pieces well, and those who can deserve credit, just like any folder who can breathe life into a diagram deserves credit.)

And I beleive Rachmaninov lived on through his scores much more than through his recordings ...

I hope that other origami artits don't feel like you do, because I would not want to fold their diagrams if they did.

[theorigamist]

Take any pianist-composer of the twentieth century, e.g. Sergej Rachmaninov

I think it's important that Joseph Wu specifically said "visual art". When a performance art is discussed, it seems much more reasonable to me to consider composition and performance separate artistic acts. I consider this true of music, plays, movies, etc. This tends not to be the case with visual arts, such as painting, sculpture, etc. Origami is an interesting case, because the degree to which works are replicated ('performed' by folders who are not the creator) is much higher than in, say, painting. Also, while there is the equivalent saying in English that "imitation is the sincerest form of flattery", there is also the saying that "possession is nine-tenths of the law."

[Cupcake]

I believe the point is that not every single musician releases the music for every single song. Sure, diagrams are great, but do we need to beg for them and go to the point of downloading them off the internet just to get them? The ones that are free for people to get are okay, the authors don't mind if you use them because they let the diagrams be there. However, how is releasing hours of work to the public without the author's consent suddenly okay?
How about Yoshizawa, for instance. How did he get the models that he wanted? Well, instead of going out and downloading the diagrams (not much of that being done back then) he folded for years and years, and started designing whatever he felt like.
Another example, involving me . A long time ago, I really like Joseph Wu's rabbit. I even ended up e-mailing him and asking him for a diagram or CP, just because I liked it that much. But there was no point, I didn't get what I wanted. So, I ended up making my first real model by trying the same size of paper listed on his website and experimenting with it until I had something.
My point is, there are plenty of diagrams on the internet for a learning folder. Use the legal ones. If you need the ones in books, then buy the books. If you can't afford it, then make it a goal. If you can't get it shipped to you, then get it sent to someone who can get it, and then they can send it to you.

[origami_8]

And once again the question arises "What about out of print books?".

[Joseph Wu]

viewtopic.php?t=3873

[bethnor]

viewtopic.php?t=3873

joseph--that thread does not answer the question so much as display that ppl are willing to pay ridiculous amounts of money for an out of print book which has diagrams of significant historical value. i don't know if the person in question was joking, but ~ 1000 euros comes to ~ $1600. fortunately, the devil has been reprinted on numerous occasions, but let's pretend that's not the case. should an average folder have to pan out ~ $1600 to learn maekawa's devil, or should they just fuhgettaboutit?