zombie84 said:

His argument is flawed regarding the 1988 Congressional statements.

I omitted parts that were irrelevant, but the part he is quoting that I left out is not a GOTCHA moment. It actually re-inforces what I was arguing. Lucas says "who better than the artist to protect the work" because he felt that the artist wouldn't alter it. Lucas was afraid that corporations owning art would lead to it be altered--which was exactlly what was happening with Turner. So, as an alternative, he proposed artists owning the rights, because they were assumed to be protective of their art more than a corporation. He was never, ever, at any time, advocating an artists right to alter and suppress films. He was simply arguing that artists would be more responsible with film history than businessmen. He's mostly correct with the one exception--himself.

So, this guy is an idiot on multiple levels. He sees what he wants. Although I am flattered that he stalked me so thoroughly. I give him points for effort, but a failing grade for not having logic.

Much to my surprise, my comment was approved.

I think it would be interesting to address the other filmmaker's who constantly tinkered with their work. A thread at the HTF reminded me of Chaplin's recutting of some of his films well in the sound era, and Abel Gance was still fiddling with his silent epic Napoleon in 1970! Those might have been influences on the SE's.