On Sat, 2004-01-24 at 10:30, Ross Werner wrote: > On Fri, 23 Jan 2004, District Webmaster wrote: > > > Just because Mozart could transcribe a symphony after hearing it doesn't > > mean he did it, then went on to perfrom the work without the author's > > permission. > > Actually, I remember hearing a story along the same lines, where some > composer had a top-secret symphony that he would only play at certain > times/places, and Mozart somehow got a ticket and copied the whole > symphony and, thereafter, played it without the original author's > permission. (And, actually, copying of whole themes and ideas was rampant > throughout classical music ... should Mozart's descendants have received > royalties every time someone plays a Variation on his Theme? After all, if > he _created_ the theme, to take his _creation_ (which /somebody/ has to > own, right?) without permission would be morally and ethically wrong, > isn't that the argument?)
The story of Mozart memorizing the music and then reproducing it is a very interesting story indeed, because like today's struggle against control and oppression by corporations who control information, in Mozart's time the exact same thing was happening vis a vie the Church and information pertaining to worship. You see the secret music that Mozart copied illegally was a liturgical piece of music that the Pope kept as his personal music, only to be played in the Vatican at certain times for the Pope and invited guests. Then, as now, this piece of music was strictly purely for the purpose of ego and pride. Mozart heard it as a young boy and pirated the score (again using the analog hole -- his mind). Since then we, hundreds of years later, have been blessed to have this music "liberated" and now available and motifs and themes that run through many different "derivative" works such as hymns (not necessarily LDS) and other symphonic works. This leads me to another point that there's no such thing as original intellectual property. Besides the fact that all knowledge and ideas belong solely to God, sometimes several people can arrive at the same "innovation" independently and even at the same time. Furthermore, like a perl script, there does not exist an original idea in the strictest sense. Everything is a derivative of something else. Whether we realize it or not, we are constantly absorbing thoughts and ideas from those around us (and they from others) and often our flashes of insight come to our minds that are inspired by the work and influence of others. And I would argue this is a good thing. Finally, DRM is hardly a new idea, and the whole idea of controlling knowledge for profit goes back hundreds of years. During the oppressive years of the Dark Ages, Latin liturgies combined with church clergy were combined to be a very real form of DRM on sacred knowledge. You could go to church and hear the word (as presented by the church), but you were restricted from any further manipulation of the data. Copying was restricted (mainly because you lacked the key to decrypt it) and education in Latin language was restricted according to class and social status. In fact some of the Reformers paid with their lives for breaking the DRM on the scriptures and redistributing it in unencumbered form. Ultimately such greed and control on the part of the church caused their control to collapse when people finally unified against it in the years leading up to the Renaissance and the Enlightenment. Also coming to mind are the craft guilds of centuries past that strove to keep knowledge secret and restricted to the detriment of most of society. While there are many who will argue that modern DRM can hardly be considered to be a religious issue (indeed the latest songs from the RIAA can really be described as garbae), when I look back over history and see the effects of such things, I have to really wonder if anything is not to be taken in a spiritual or religious light. And I have to conclude that as a God-believing, religious person (apparently not the same type of practicing Mormon as Darl McBride), I have to oppose DRM and IP oppression as a matter of principle. That means I fully support copyright laws (fighting to return them to states or normalcy), and the principles of honesty and decency, and expect others to also. Michael > > ~ross -- Michael Torrie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ____________________ BYU Unix Users Group http://uug.byu.edu/ ___________________________________________________________________ List Info: http://uug.byu.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/uug-list
