Originally posted by Axl_Rose
A painter has no right to charge people who glance at his work, or inadventantly see it without being prepared to pay.

Uhhh... why not? He'd just have to control where the painting was seen. If he allows it to be spread out over the city on bus stops, sure, you're right. But if he decides only to show it in specific art galleries, then he is charging people to see it. To be more specific, people are paying for the opportunity to see it, they might not even look at his particular painting.

An artist of any sort has all the rights in the world for his art. It's preposterous to say that "an artist has no right...". It's the audience that has the limited rights.