[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: ISMLP/WIMA (?)
From: |
Hans Aberg |
Subject: |
Re: ISMLP/WIMA (?) |
Date: |
Thu, 19 Jan 2012 22:52:03 +0100 |
On 19 Jan 2012, at 21:58, David Raleigh Arnold wrote:
> On Thu, 2012-01-19 at 11:05 -0800, Bernardo Barros wrote:
>>> Open software people tend to consider artists as being
>>> equivalent to programmers, so they think artists
>>> should starve. I have no sympathy with that view.
>>> Obviously. Knowledge should be free, Yale to the
>>> contrary. Art shouldn't be free until the artist gets his.
>>
>> The source code of the lilypond score is not the `music' or even
>> `art', so maybe people get confused.
>
> That is true of the program code, but not the data.
According to the WIPO Copyright Treaty, computer programs are protected as
literary works as in the Berne Convention:
http://www.wipo.int/treaties/en/ip/wct/trtdocs_wo033.html#P56_5626
> The
> document must carry a copyright notice if it contains
> the notes, because it is the composition written in a
> form of musical notation. The complete source, published
> with a copyright notice, would copyright the piece.
> Published without the notice, all copyright would be
> lost.
This is not the case in the US since 1989:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_notice
Hans
- Re: ISMLP/WIMA (?), (continued)
- Re: ISMLP/WIMA (?), David Raleigh Arnold, 2012/01/19
- Re: ISMLP/WIMA (?), Bernardo Barros, 2012/01/19
- Re: ISMLP/WIMA (?), David Raleigh Arnold, 2012/01/19
- Re: ISMLP/WIMA (?), David Kastrup, 2012/01/19
- Re: ISMLP/WIMA (?), David Raleigh Arnold, 2012/01/20
- Re: ISMLP/WIMA (?), David Kastrup, 2012/01/20
- Re: ISMLP/WIMA (?), David Raleigh Arnold, 2012/01/22
- Re: ISMLP/WIMA (?),
Hans Aberg <=
- Re: ISMLP/WIMA (?), PMA, 2012/01/19
- Re: ISMLP/WIMA (?), Hayden Muhl, 2012/01/19
- Re: ISMLP/WIMA (?), PMA, 2012/01/19
- Re: ISMLP/WIMA (?), PMA, 2012/01/20
Re: ISMLP/WIMA (?), Hans Aberg, 2012/01/17