Yeah, but then the argument that allowing derivative works ruins the original is still flawed. If the way you appreciate art is directly linked to your past experiences (which obviously they are) then the original work is already "ruined" whether you've experienced a derivative work before or not.
back
1 comments
The only way a derivative work can truly "ruin" an original is if it obscures the source material or otherwise prevents the audience from accessing it.
There may be a weak argument to be made there in favor of copyrights, since a derivative work could be so much more popular than the original that people are no longer willing to pay enough to maintain it. But it isn't as though a book will spontaneously burn itself if someone writes an unauthorized sequel or translation. The worst that could possibly happen to it is that people stop making fresh copies and forget that it exists.
That's the real ruin for artwork--being thrown into the Lethe.