Precisely. I would bet that, however true your post is, it will not be moderated as insightful nor informative (most people here are GPL zealots). You (and now me too) will be happy when our posts are not moderated as Troll. God bless those who dare to say the truth.
Cheers
PS - GPL is not perfect and it is capable of preventing research, development, and progress in some fields. Communism does not *always* work.
Hiding ciphertext within pictures or sounds does not work. They are mathematical methods to detect that a picture or a sound contains encrypted data (unusual noise). There is currently only one steganographic method I am aware of that really works. It is hiding ciphertext within ciphertext. I know only of one open source and free program that realises this scheme: TrueCrypt. And here is how they do it.
I'm not sure about that "500 channel future" which the TV executives were hoping for... However, I've got 632 channels right now and think I won't ever do anything else but eating, sleeping, and yes, pressing buttons on the remote...
What plans do you have should somebody bring a lawsuit against you?
I have no plans. I rely on the low probability. I also have no plans what I will do when an asteroid is reported to be on a collision track with Earth.
Seriously, should the improbable (i.e. a plagiarism lawsuit) happen, then I will of course defend myself (or my attorney will) as any other innocent person would do (I don't think I have to go into any details here).
Unlike the trademark database, I don't see how the copyright database is searchable by content.
And that's why I said: "You have to rely on the low probability of two composers writing the same tune."
Had you read the essay linked from the word "taken" (I'll link it again), you would see that this probability isn't as low as you claim.
I am a composer myself. I know, from practical experience, that the probability is quite low, unless we are talking about tunes consisting of 2 or 3 notes. Opinions may differ.
> A random number generator does not create music.
Well, yes, that's what I was saying.
> White noise does not sound like music
Which is, again, what I was saying. When you use purely random values (white noise) as note pitches, note durations, and timings, the probability that you will get desirable music is close to zero.
> Instead, a stream of random numbers could be used to drive a system with significant correlations across time and pitch.
There are many programs that do just that (i.e. not-so-random music generator). They usually use model phrases, basic chord progression and other techniques. I have tested these programs quite extensively. (FWIW, the music they produce is somewhat undesirable and odd, well at least to me, somebody might like it).
> Do you have a formal rule for determining whether a given sample is music or sound effects? It would probably amuse me no end to see it.
I am sure that a decent musicologist would give you such a formal rule. I am a composer, not a musicologist. I just feel (and I think that most people do) that there is a difference between a sole sound effect and music. For instance, the noise made by the wind in the trees. You think it is music, I think it is just a sound. I am not going to argue with you. It is only a matter of opinion and the way you perceive music.
Music and language are indeed similar in many ways. Have you ever noticed that English intonation (other languages too) is exactly the same thing that we define as melody? Intonation in some languages is quite monotonous, but in some languages, like English, it is very apparent that speakers are actually singing the sentences they are saying.
If you let a random number generator create music, the result is always undesirable. Music must not be random, there must be relations between notes (horizontally and vertically), and it must make a "sense". That these rules exist in our brains or souls does not necessarily mean that patterns in music mimic the patterns used by our brains store memories and emotions. It is rather a mere coincidence of two symptoms or characteristics.
Judges let composers enforce copyrights like they let writers. Author's intellectual
property certainly deserves to be protected, be it a novel, painting, musical composition,
or software.
How can anyone know whether a particular word is already taken?
Well, there are institutions that maintain
databases of copyrighted works. In the US, a complete copy (lead sheet or sheet
music) or phonorecord (disk or tape) is required. Complete means
that the deposit includes everything that is to be covered by the registration.
In some European countries they only require musical notation, several bars
of a tune, usually the main theme. Whether a particular word is
already taken is difficult to find out. You have to rely on the low probability
of two composers writing the same tune.
Slashdot Mirror
Precisely. I would bet that, however true your post is, it will not be moderated as insightful nor informative (most people here are GPL zealots). You (and now me too) will be happy when our posts are not moderated as Troll. God bless those who dare to say the truth. Cheers PS - GPL is not perfect and it is capable of preventing research, development, and progress in some fields. Communism does not *always* work.
Hiding ciphertext within pictures or sounds does not work. They are mathematical methods to detect that a picture or a sound contains encrypted data (unusual noise). There is currently only one steganographic method I am aware of that really works. It is hiding ciphertext within ciphertext. I know only of one open source and free program that realises this scheme: TrueCrypt. And here is how they do it.
It seems that Her Majesty Queen had a great time playing Populous.
Not many people know, but such tactics are also used by CIA.
Which ones?
Poland, Hungary, Czech Republic, etc. All are democratic EU countries and their residents cannot create PayPal accounts.
I'm not sure about that "500 channel future" which the TV executives were hoping for... However, I've got 632 channels right now and think I won't ever do anything else but eating, sleeping, and yes, pressing buttons on the remote...
--
The probability of an asteriod hitting doesn't compare to the probability of you using the same sequence as another composer.
How did I know that somebody would say that. Well, I sort of hoped that the sarcasm (and the deliberate exaggeration) in my post would be obvious...
--
What plans do you have should somebody bring a lawsuit against you?
I have no plans. I rely on the low probability. I also have no plans what I will do when an asteroid is reported to be on a collision track with Earth.
Seriously, should the improbable (i.e. a plagiarism lawsuit) happen, then I will of course defend myself (or my attorney will) as any other innocent person would do (I don't think I have to go into any details here).
Cheers,
--
I said the probability is low, not zero.
--
Unlike the trademark database, I don't see how the copyright database is searchable by content.
And that's why I said: "You have to rely on the low probability of two composers writing the same tune."
Had you read the essay linked from the word "taken" (I'll link it again), you would see that this probability isn't as low as you claim.
I am a composer myself. I know, from practical experience, that the probability is quite low, unless we are talking about tunes consisting of 2 or 3 notes. Opinions may differ.
--
> A random number generator does not create music.
Well, yes, that's what I was saying.
> White noise does not sound like music
Which is, again, what I was saying. When you use purely random values (white noise) as note pitches, note durations, and timings, the probability that you will get desirable music is close to zero.
> Instead, a stream of random numbers could be used to drive a system with significant correlations across time and pitch.
There are many programs that do just that (i.e. not-so-random music generator). They usually use model phrases, basic chord progression and other techniques. I have tested these programs quite extensively. (FWIW, the music they produce is somewhat undesirable and odd, well at least to me, somebody might like it).
--
> I apologize if my post seemed sarcastic and argumentative.
Not at all. No need to apologize.
> Already you're describing one set of sounds as less worthy than another.
I did not mean any sound is less worthy than another. A sound is a cell, music is an organism.
Cheers,
--
Of course, the decision whether there is a breach of copyright or not is up to the court of law. The database only provides legal ground.
--
> Do you have a formal rule for determining whether a given sample is music or sound effects? It would probably amuse me no end to see it.
I am sure that a decent musicologist would give you such a formal rule. I am a composer, not a musicologist. I just feel (and I think that most people do) that there is a difference between a sole sound effect and music. For instance, the noise made by the wind in the trees. You think it is music, I think it is just a sound. I am not going to argue with you. It is only a matter of opinion and the way you perceive music.
--
> Don't you like the sound of rain falling, the
> wind in the trees, birds, dogs etc?
The wind in the trees and dogs barking are sound effects, not music.
(FWIW, I write music, mainly using synthesizers.)
--
Music and language are indeed similar in many ways. Have you ever noticed that English intonation (other languages too) is exactly the same thing that we define as melody? Intonation in some languages is quite monotonous, but in some languages, like English, it is very apparent that speakers are actually singing the sentences they are saying.
If you let a random number generator create music, the result is always undesirable. Music must not be random, there must be relations between notes (horizontally and vertically), and it must make a "sense". That these rules exist in our brains or souls does not necessarily mean that patterns in music mimic the patterns used by our brains store memories and emotions. It is rather a mere coincidence of two symptoms or characteristics.
How can anyone know whether a particular word is already taken?
Well, there are institutions that maintain databases of copyrighted works. In the US, a complete copy (lead sheet or sheet music) or phonorecord (disk or tape) is required. Complete means that the deposit includes everything that is to be covered by the registration. In some European countries they only require musical notation, several bars of a tune, usually the main theme. Whether a particular word is already taken is difficult to find out. You have to rely on the low probability of two composers writing the same tune.