Re: [microsound] copyright...

[aleks <bvasic@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

----- Original Message -----

> for everyone's edification:
>
>     http://www.dsl.org/copyleft/
>
> does a copyright still serve a function when referring to 'microsound,
> lowercase, etc.', because it could be stated that the recordings are
> artifacts of copyrighted, patented, and trademarked hardware, software,
> and/or design processes?
>
> is the manipulator of these deigns and processes actually a creator (as
> stated in common copyright law)?
>
> best,
> marc
>


Couldnt you apply this line of thought to any creative process?  From film
making to the creation of traditional music.  They all use patented tools or
technologies.

Whats the difference between the patent on Reaktor and that of a patent on a
certain film camera used in making a movie?

Its all a moot point IMO.  A company like Native Instruments earns its
living off of other people using their software for their creative needs and
purposes.   These technologies were created for a large user base.  The
public.  It would be different if it was a propietary piece of software
implemented only by the conmpany that created it, for a specialized use
within said coorporation.

Once you buy a program, hardware whtever, it is your property.  A tool to be
used as you please.  This seems pretty common sense to me.


aLEKs