bb> What about the attribution to Cage? Not that I care, but I wonder if
part of their point is that Batt sites Cage as an author...
I mean, copyright pursuit of people who are recontextualizing is one thing,
but citation of someone as an 'author' and then not 'paying' them seems
like a different mess altogether.
At 20:14 23/06/2002 -0500, Carrie McLaren wrote:
>I forwarded this article to Siva Vaidhyanathan, and he had an interesting
>comment:
>
>
><<<The only thing a court would support from the Cage peoples' claim is
>that arranging silence into exactly 4 min 33 secs constitutes
>"originality" under the law. The silence itself is not protectable. So
>they might have a claim against a composer who issued exactly 4:33 of
>silence. But 4:34 is not protectable. It's a new arrangement. That was
>Cage's point, after all. See his book Silence.>>>
>
>
>----------------------------------------------------
>Rumori, the Detritus.net Discussion List
>to unsubscribe, send mail to majordomoATdetritus.net
>with "unsubscribe rumori" in the message body.
>----------------------------------------------------
>Rumori list archives & other information are at
>http://detritus.net/contact/rumori
>----------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------
Rumori, the Detritus.net Discussion List
to unsubscribe, send mail to majordomoATdetritus.net
with "unsubscribe rumori" in the message body.
----------------------------------------------------
Rumori list archives & other information are at
http://detritus.net/contact/rumori
----------------------------------------------------
"The 'new, new economy' is not about information or the internet or connectivity or content or any of the other standard industry blather, it is about property, as it always is in a class society." - McKenzie Wark