|
|
|
|
|
by EdHominem
3509 days ago
|
|
The distinction is that the music is being composed as a creative activity and the notes are the essence of the production. The chess game is a game, winning is the game, and the notation is just one of many possible transcriptions of it. If you composed a poem from chess notation, it would be copyrightable. If you transcribed a chess game (mechanically) with a series of notes, it would not be. And besides, if there was creativity (for its own sake) in the process and the moves were copyrightable it would be the players, not the stenographer, that owned it. |
|
In an alternative reality where the players agreed that they were creating a creative work together, and signed the copyright to it over contractually, would your attitude change?
Can you talk a little bit about why a very short riff such as 10-12 notes of this -- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1nLCa0YG1ZI&t=57s
should be subject to copyright? (I also may be mistaken factually - perhaps it's not subject to copyright.)
As you can see from that video, there really are very few choices regarding the "next note". Maybe a few more choices than the possible legal moves on a board - but not by much.
>If you transcribed a chess game (mechanically) with a series of notes, it would not be.
I find this very very hard to believe. If I came up with simple rules for transcribing a chess game with notes and then discovered that for a particular chess game this was pleasant, you really don't think I could copyright that tune?
I'd be shocked if that were the case.