<?xml version="1.0" encoding="ISO-8859-1"?>

<rss version="2.0" xmlns:blogChannel="http://backend.userland.com/blogChannelModule">

<channel>
<title>Yo, That's No Painting -- That's An Historic Object (Trees And Things)</title>
<link>http://www.treesandthings.com/story/2006/11/22/142918/67</link>
<description>When is a piece of art more than a piece of art? &#160;When does your property become something you can't sell? &#160;These questions are playing themselves out right now in Philadelphia where one Philadelphia institution is fighting another Philadelphia institution &lt;a href="http://www.philly.com/mld/inquirer/news/local/16062859.htm">over the right to sell a painting&lt;/a>.</description>
<language>en-us</language>
<pubDate>Sun, 3 Dec 2006 19:03:44 EST</pubDate>
<lastBuildDate>Mon, 4 Dec 2006 10:01:05 EST</lastBuildDate>

<item>
<title>rombuu: What a shame...</title>
<link>http://www.treesandthings.com/story/2006/11/22/142918/67#2</link>
<description>...anyone who was upset about the whole &#160;eminent domain thing a couple of years ago should be equally upset about this horrible violation of someone's property rights. &#160;This is really just inexcusable. &#160;Hopefully someone realizes all of Mayo</description>
<pubDate>Mon, 4 Dec 2006 10:01:05 EST</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>eduardo: Can art be owned/sold/destroyed?</title>
<link>http://www.treesandthings.com/story/2006/11/22/142918/67#1</link>
<description>Interesting, I had a very similar thought when I saw the Borat movie - in particular the scene where he destroyed 1/2 of the antique shop's items. &lt;br>&#10;</description>
<pubDate>Sun, 3 Dec 2006 21:18:38 EST</pubDate>
</item>

<textInput>
<title>Search Trees And Things</title>
<description></description>
<name>string</name>
<link>http://www.treesandthings.com/search/</link>
</textInput>

</channel>
</rss>