Ah, thanks, Michael, for letting me know. I had intended to send it to the list. But I doubt it's important enough to warrant doing so now! ;-) Your post reminded me of it, being the "reductio ad absurdem" of the line you were following: if stealing a phrase of 4 notes (three Gs followed by the Eb a third below, say...) is infringement of copyright, how about "stealing" a single note? (Or, in the apocryphal sense someone else brought up, using in one's own piece some fraction of Cage's 4'33"... But for that matter, Cage himself might be vulnerable to an infringement suit from the estate of W.A.Mozart-- wasn't it he who made some oft-quoted pronouncement about the silences being at least as important as the notes?) Enough! I *rest* my case ;-) Cheers, Ch.S.
Michael Edwards wrote: > > >> If you are dealing with small enough portions of melody, it would be almost > >> impossible to compose a melody without bits of it being very similar to other > >> melodies. It would be a bit like trying to write a novel making sure that no > >> 3- or 4-word phrases didn't occur somewhere else in other novels. > >> > > There's an old viola joke, about the violist who got mad because some conductor > > said he couldn't play accurate 32nd notes-- so he played one, just to show he >could. > > Yes, viola-players seem to get a rough time and become the butt of > everyone's musical humour. > But in fact, while I suspect you meant to send this to the list, it was > sent to me only as a private e-mail. Just in case you overlooked this (perhaps > because of the new way the list is configured), I thought I'd tell you that only > I got this, if you want to try sending it again to the list. > > Regards, > Michael Edwards. _______________________________________________ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
