And what about honoring agreements that are made? Are artists so special that they are allowed to ignore them? From Scott's perspective, he had an agreement with sculptor Van Hoeydonck to make the original and the copy as the only two to be made as they were memorials to fallen astronauts. Van Hoeydonck contends that they were for all of mankind and thus he can make and sell as many copies as he wanted.[. . .]
I know this depends on stereotyping to some degree but:
Have you ever worked with the engineering type whose rational demeanor and levelheadedness allows for the calm deliberate action one must take in the face of rapidly changing potentially deadly environmental conditions?
Being on /., I'm going to take a guess you have.
Now, have you ever worked with the artistic type whose sensibilities are attuned to impossible-to-quantify and difficult-to-articulate aesthetic contours and dimensions of plastic art, whose manner and behavior drive that artist to produce artwork that is often vilified and ridiculed to be later held up by succeeding generations as works of artistic genius?
Could these two types of people ever have a "meaningful" enduring contract sealed only with words and a handshake?
(I hear there is at least a third type of person whose canny judgement and profit-incentive leads them to forge documents tens of thousands of words long which specify the conditions and behavior of bonded parties, and these third types aren't always looked upon favorably by the engineering and artistic types.)
