|
|
|
| Authored by: Wol on Tuesday, May 21 2013 @ 12:24 PM EDT |
"accidental infringement" is to a large extent a non-legal invention
of the copyright maximalists.
If I produce an exact copy of your work, but I've never seen or heard of your
work, then it's not copyright infringement. It's independent production and
copyright in my version rests with me.
That's why this mess over "a couple of notes" is so damaging - AGAIN -
in that the people who claimed copyright almost certainly obtained it from
somewhere else in exactly the same way they claim Men at Work or the Beatles
stole it from them!
How on earth can you claim copyright in a fragment of music!? It's like claiming
copyright in a single short sentence, that quite likely has been rewritten loads
of times in multiple stories. "In the beginning ..." "and they
all lived happily ever after."
Cheers,
Wol[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, May 22 2013 @ 05:24 AM EDT |
Let's compare two sentences there:
"A copyright covers the
expression of an idea,
not the idea." This is
true.
and:
The 'idea' may be expressed in many
ways, but
if that sequence of notes is already copyright, you're
infringing
See what you've done there? In three quick
paragraphs
you've gone from saying I'm wrong to saying I'm right. Tell
me
again: Is it the idea or the expression that's
copyrightable? [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
- Er, right - Authored by: PJ on Wednesday, May 22 2013 @ 07:14 AM EDT
- Er, right - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, May 22 2013 @ 08:07 AM EDT
|
|
|
|
