"LOL, you're really out there, ain't ya buddy?
Let's say Bill Gates goes out and buys the Mona Lisa and just about every classic piece of art available, and then burns them all."
First of all, explain to me how this "never gonna happen" scenario isn't "out there" in and of itself
Secondly, in case you weren't aware, Bill Gates is behaving exactly like Lucas is in many ways...
First of all, Bill Gates never created DOS. He bought it from someone else and sold it off as his own software. I'll bet he's never written a piece a code since Windows. This would loosely tie in with your description of Lucas' "ownership" of ESB/ROTJ.
Furthermore, like Lucas, Bill Gates no longer acknowledges old versions of Windows (much less DOS) by stopping support for them, and only selling the "newest" version - also analogous to Lucas claiming the O-OT no longer exists.
"How you feel about those actions has NOTHING to do with legal ownership, and everything to do with a meglomaniac wantonly destroying pieces of our cultural heritage."
Whatever that means. How about we talk about what I like to call the "real world", and find a more reasonable example than your prior attempt:
O.J. Simpson's Heisman trophy.
First of all, I think O.J. was guilty, and should have been punished. That being said, when I saw that his Heisman trophy had been bought at auction and deliberately destroyed, I thought that was a ridiculous gesture. The trophy had nothing to do with the murder, nor did destroying it bring back the victims or bring any relief to the remaining family. It was simply an act committed as a gesture against what O.J. had recently done.
Now, I don't even want to watch old Police Squad movies anymore, because O.J.'s appearance in them kinda spoils the fun for me, but...
Did the people who bought the trophy at auction "own" it? Yes.
Did the people who bought the trophy at auction have the right destroy it? Yes
Was it necessary to destroy it? No. Even though I would never want to look upon the trophy personally, it does represent an important event, and its destruction was a real shame..
Now, back to Lucas. He is ultimately responsible for the Star Wars saga, regardless of whoever else worked on the films. He has put serious time, effort and money into these films, and has fought tooth and nail to maintain ownership of them from the studios. In the end, they are his baby.
Does he "own" them? Yes - especially after going back and purchasing the rights to ANH from Fox, WHICH OWNED ANH PRIOR TO THIS, in case you weren't aware of that little fact.
Does he have the right to change/modify/alter them? Yes, and has in fact done so long before the SE's ever came around. This was simply the greatest and most deliberate set of changes performed on the films at any one time.
Now, for the million dollar question: Should he change them?
In my personal opinion, no. In Lucas' opinion, why not?
They were fine the way they were, but he feels otherwise, and that's a sad fact for people like me and you to take. This is why I've invested over a thousand dollars and hours transferring the best LD material of the original films to DVD. Lucas is going to do what he wants, and I am going to do what I want.
And the next time you feel like contriving ridiculous pie-in-the-sky scenarios in some lame attempt to misrepresent how I feel about this situation: don't, because, once again, it misses the point entirely.
"They were paid to do their jobs, like a cameraman or a grip is. Do you think the costume designer should have a say in way George wants his films to look? It's basically they same thing."
Let's not forget about the first editor of ANH, whom George fired because he didn't want to edit the film George's way. Apparently, that guy thought ANH was his film.
