Re: chess moves

On Thu, May 11, 2000, Thomas Workman <tworkman[_at_]erols.com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, 10 May 2000, Tyler Ochoa <tochoa[_at_]law.whittier.edu> wrote:
> >
> > On 05/09/2000, Thomas Workman <tworkman[_at_]erols.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > I disagree with the rationale that chess moves are not protectable
> > > because to do so would inhibit play of the game. Under this logic,
> > > music would not be protected because to do so might inhibit
> > > composers from creating new works.
> >
> > I disagree with your analogy. Unlike music, chess is a competitive
> > enterprise.
>
> I am not sure how you define "competitive". Composers are
> certainly competitive, as are jazz musicians who compose on the fly.
>
> > The whole point of the game is for players to compete.
>
> As an amateur musician and one who once played chess competitively
> (I was not good at it, however) -- I do not see the distinction.

Post well taken.

As someone who both plays chess and makes music poorly, I'm surprised the topic of Jazz hasn't been raised yet. Both within a single performance, and in different pieces, performances, and arrangements, performers and arrangers/composers are continually copying, imitating, improvising, extending, and branching off one another's works.

There was an MCAP copyright anthology (IIRC) article on the very topic of copyright in jazz within the past three or four years. I wasn't able to read the entire piece, but was struck that at least *one* other person had the presence of mind to think of how Jazz does or doesn't fit within conventions of copyright.

--
Karsten M. Self <kmself[_at_]ix.netcom.com>         http:/www.netcom.com/~kmself/
    What part of "Gestalt" don't you understand?
    http://gestalt-system.sourceforge.net/
GPG fingerprint: F932 8B25 5FDD 2528 D595  DC61 3847 889F 55F2 B9B0