> dukuso wrote:
>> ..only if it contains creative work. If you just put sentences
>> together randomly by computer, following some grammatics and
>> then call each collection of 4 sentences a poem, I doubt that
>> it can be copyright.
> Computer generated (not random) music, poetry and prose *have*
> been generated, published and copyrighted, regardless of if the
> *should* have been or not.
in what country, under what circumstances ? Were only the random
instances copyright or were there other aspects to make some
"arrangement" and "presentation" of the random instances ?
Is copying or putting some instances into a
public database on the illegal ?
> dukuso wrote:
>> But are the notes of a song copyright?
I once figured out by myself the notes of a pop-song
(only the main theme in BASIC's "play"-format) and stored
them on several places and copied it to other HDs. Even sent
it to others by email. Was that illegal ?
What about the notes for that silent piano piece below ???
> dukuso wrote:
>> tso wrote:
>>> The fact that I may have created that song with computer program
>>> without human intervention will be unlikely to make a difference
>>> one way or another. What about John Cage's 4'33?
>> it might make a difference, if you can't somehow distinguish it from
>> other pieces generated by computer. An how difficult it is, how
>> long the computer needs, whether the used program is public domain.
>> I think, you can't copyright random noise.
>What can and can't be protected is subjective, not objective.
again, why then do we have laws ? They should at least make one or the
the other decision a bit more likely - independent from the judge.
>One jury will say yes, another will say no.
how likely is a yes ?
>John Cage's 4'33 is a piano piece that is 4 minutes and 33 seconds
?? so how can he prove it's a piano piece ?
>It is a protected work regardless of whether you or I feel it should be.
"One jury will say yes, another will say no." (c)Tso2005 ;-)
> dukuso wrote:
>> where is the creative work when you choose a random sample of them ?
>First -- again, this will be a subjective decision.
>Second -- the fact that the sample is random does NOT imply
>that the *selection* is.
but my quoted question clearly assumes this
>Much creative work is selecting out
>from the background of random choices. If Argus has his software
>create several hundred puzzles -- a) they're not at random,
>as he wrote the software and adjusted the parameters to get
>what he wanted and b) even if they WERE random, he then
>CHOOSES the one's he likes for what ever reason he likes
>and publishes those.
>See the fully protected work: A Million Random Digits
presumably not every single digit is protected ;-)
>It wasn't that long ago that all Sudoku were created by hand --
>maybe an hour or two for the composer to set it as s/he likes it,
>test it for accuracy and difficulty. Surely you have to allow
>that this was "creative work".
as much as math-proofs are and discoveries of combinatorical objects.
Both of which can't be copyrighted. (do we agree here ?)
But do I understand correctly, that you think that only handmade
sudokus can be copyrighted ?
>This does not change because computers can also make them.
what is considered "creative work" might quite well change.
The law doesn't say that the definition of creative work at
time of creating is decisive. The legislative is free to
specify upon what is considered "creative work" after the
work was completed.
But even those people who create sudokus by computer
(e.g. Vegard,Argus,Simes) often claim copyright for them.
>All that matters is what is on the page.
>A painter makes a portrait. She owns this work and has rights
>covering the distribution of copies of it.
>A photographer, aims his camera *at random" at takes a photograph.
>He has all the same rights as the painter.
>There are more than one professional blind photographer -- their
>work is protected.
so, let them make a photograph or painting of their sudokus and
claim copyright for the photograph or painting.
But not for the sudoku itself as stored in my database as 81 digits.
>No -- I'm saying that:
>mizu no oto
>... is a poem, a Haiku.
ahh, it's only one Haiku, not three.
>but if you take 100 of Argus's puzzles, make a book from them
>and sell it, he may very well have cause for action against you,
>unless you have his permission.
He refused to discuss this.
OK, I'm willing to test it. I just took his 100 posted puzzles
and removed his "copyright" file and reposted them with a note
of mine that they are public domain.http://www.setbb.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?p=1649&mforum=sudoku#1649
>> tso wrote:
>>> In fact, the DVD of the movie is essentially this. Can I ethically
>>> sell this integer without permission?
>> when you just sell it as an integer and don't print on the cover
>> or advertise otherwise that it's the movie it should be allowed.
>So I can sell MP3's as long as I don't *tell* the buyer that
>they are bootleg Rolling Stones?
I would say yes. (don't know what "bootleg Rolling Stones" is, though.)
>An mp3 is just an integer.
I couldn't find this in any lexicon. But I could find that a sudoku
is a QWH, (which is my main argument and which you keep astonishingly
silent about, BTW.)
>DVDs, MP3s, like DNA, contain instructions on how to use them
>within the code. The buyer will figure it out.
the buyer will buy a DVD without label in the hope it contains
a special song ?
>By that logic,
>I could type up a copy of your novel and sell it as long as
>I didn't tell the buyer what it was.
no, I wrote the following sentence
>>suppose you could copyright integers. Then there must be a
>>smallest copyrightable integer. What is it ?
>You're trying to apply logic where none exits.
logic is everywhere
>Nothing in copyright law -- or any other type of law -- is immutable.
you're free to choose any time since 1975 (US-Copyright Act)
and give us the smallest copyrighted positive integer of that time.
>Suppose you could copyright songs, poetry, fiction. Then there
>must be a smallest copyrightable song, poem, story. What is it ?
probably one of your Haikus. I'm no specialist on Haikus -
choose the smallest you can find.
I'm not so happy with your strategy of cutting - I'm afraid my main point,
the sudoku-QWH-latin square-permutation-number-math.proof thing
might be cut again ...