Noel Stoutenburg wrote:
I have not explored in any detail, the Sibelius software patents, and if there are any that relate to items like dynamic parts linking, or house styles
I have no inside knowledge, but I think it is highly unlikely MM will be hesitant to implement dynamic parts linking due to patents. The prior art already existed in Mosaic, and anyway it is an idea that has been around longer than any of them, in spreadsheets for example. (Multiple views of the same data.)
I am also skeptical that any meaningful patent prevents Finale from implementing house styles. Without knowing anything about Sib's structure, I nevertheless feel confident in asserting they are probably utterly different. I suspect house styles were "designed in" for Sibelius whereas for Finale I know they were not. Finale's best answer to house styles will likely be some expanded form of control over its libraries along (perhaps) with soft-assignment of attributes. (The only such soft assignment feature now is the music font in FinMac, which appears at the top of the font list. FinWin does not have this feature.)
The barriers to both D.P. and H.S. are almost certainly technical and financial rather than legal.
-- Robert Patterson http://RobertGPatterson.com _______________________________________________ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
