Re: [ARSCLIST] Why preserve (and the wacky world of copyright)

[Karl Miller <karl.miller@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

"Steven C. Barr(x)" <stevenc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:    ----- Original Message ----- 
From: "RA Friedman" 
> Ideas, being abstract concepts, are always public domain. The problem is the cultural artifact embodies an elixir of idea and form that are inseparable; interpretation changes and often can be discussed, but not completely grasped unless the original, or reasonable facsimile thereof, is presented.

***OTOH, a PRESENTATION of an idea can be granted protection...either via the grant of a Patent or the granting of copyright on the published version of that idea. 
   
  As an aside,  I was recently informed of a situation where one scholar was being threatened with legal action by another scholar. In a recent publication one of the scholars referred to the folk influence that could be found in a particular composer's work. Another scholar reading that statement pointed to their own publication which predated the publication in question. That publication had stated that composer X's music was influenced by folk music. So, this scholar threatened to sue the other scholar because credit was not given for that observation. It is a bit like suggesting that if you encounter a house painted grey and you are the first person to publish that the house was painted grey, anyone else who publishes an article which refers to that house being grey would have to give you credit, or perhaps even pay a license for making that statement. 
   
  I found the claim to be absurd, but it does make one wonder as to what really constitutes an original idea...
   
  Karl