Have these Plans ever been tried...

[texasbagpiper]

Possible Harrington C# Chanter
Owned by Kevin Rowsome

[billh]

Possible Harrington C# Chanter
Owned by Kevin Rowsome

Copyright 1998 David C. Daye.
...

You checked with DDaye before reposting?

I haven't tried these measurements. There's a point at about 6.7mm diameter that looks suspicious, not sure I trust that one. The throat is a little large as well, not sure about that, but the reed seat data looks reasonably smooth overall, so perhaps it's the original throat.

Bill

[texasbagpiper]

Possible Harrington C# Chanter
Owned by Kevin Rowsome

Copyright 1998 David C. Daye.
...

You checked with DDaye before reposting?


Bill

No Bill , this is public info on his website... I'm not listing it as my own as I'm sure you know... The listing does say "Copyright 1998 David C. Daye " This info is for individual pipe study, not for sale... etc... Jeesh

Thanks for your input...

[glands]

I have played that particular chanter. It seems to be set up for a left-handed player so the keys bothered me a little. Otherwise, some of the toneholes are in unusual places and the stretchs seemed different than the usual chanter. Maddie Connelys (? sp) C# Willie Rowsome chanter had very similar tone hole spacings and I wondered whether WR owned and reproduced the chanter subject of this post. that said....I DID NOT do the instrument justice but it was excellent when Kevin Rowsome played it. The similar WR C# is so very much different from the WR C# that Kevin plays...different tone hole spacings, etc. both sound tremendous. However, my intuition fits best with the WR C# that Kevin owns. The one I prefer requires much less pressure and the tone is more pleasing to my ear...possibly the difference between boxwood and ebony.

[ausdag]

...

[Jim McGuire]

No patent - no issue.

[glands]

How legitimate is copyright anyway, on measurements of someone else's chanter? It's not like DD thought it up himself. I wouldn't be too happy if someone measured up my chanter (after I was long dead), put the data up for public view and then attached his own copyright to it. Did DD get permission from Harrington's decendants for permission to post what possibly to Harrington was classified data on his chanter bores?

I agree completely. Why post the numbers in the first place?

I suppose that copying the chanter based on another mans measurements is akin to me letting the medical students who round with me provide important data relevant to patient care and not verifying the data myself before making decisions that affect peoples lives.

Bottom line..... I'd recommend personally measuring any chanter yourself if you intend to copy it. Play the well-reeded original so that you know what you are striving to copy. Make sure that you can reed it first.

[billh]

David makes it clear on his website that re-posting *any* information he posts there may only be done with permission of the copyright holder. You guys are misinformed. The only info that can be republished without permission is small excerpts that fall under the 'fair use' guidelines which vary from country to country.

Also, though the bore shape itself is not DDaye's copyright, clearly, the exact numbers _are_ because they represent his collection and representation of those numbers as opposed to someone else's.

Just because something is published doesn't make it public domain, that would defeat the whole notion of copyright - posting the info verbatim, in a public online forum, is 'republication'. You can post a _link_ to David's site or anything on it, no problem. You are right that it's helpful to include David's original "Copyright..." statement, regardless of whether you agree with its intent, but strictly speaking that's not enough.

Bill

[David Lim]

Also, though the bore shape itself is not DDaye's copyright, clearly, the exact numbers _are_ because they represent his collection and representation of those numbers as opposed to someone else's.
Bill

Bill, if someone measures a chanter from a living maker does this reasoning mean the data is theirs to copyright?

David

[ausdag]

...

[billh]

As I said, it's not the bore data that's being copyrighted, it's a particular _presentation_ of that data, and the _exact_ numerical representation. i.e. the specific set of numbers including all the decimal places. If someone else measures that stick, they will end up with different numbers and in all likelihood present them slightly differently.

Before someone asks - simply reformatting the information, or changing a few decimal places, does not solve the problem, as the new presentation is still 'derived' from the old one rather directly. It's like trying to avoid plagiarism by changing the grammar of a paragraph.

To take an example: if I visit a museum and describe, in detail, a painting, I have not asserted ownership of the painting. Anyone else is free to write their own description, and the two may in fact be very similar. But each description is protected by copyright held by the 'author' of the description, and should not be reproduced without the consent of the author.

You're right that there is a separate issue of rights to information about, or the 'design' of, a particular chanter. My personal feeling is that restricting access to or use of the design of long-dead makers' work does nothing good for pipemaking. This sort of 'rights' issue is a bit more like a _photograph_ of a painting; you can't legally publish photos of a painting without the permission of the 'holder of rights' to the painting's image (usually the painting's owner), but also once you've obtained that permission, someone else can't come along and rip off your photo without your say-so. There are 'implicit' permissions too, for instance museums which allow photography "for noncommercial use" are giving blanket permission for certain kinds of uses and not others. If someone allows their chanter to be measured, they should probably be explicit about what uses of the data they are allowing. Failure to do so can lead to problems.

But this discussion is not about that, it's about copying someone else's published material without permission.

Note also that "permission" can be granted in a license statement or paragraph that explicitly permits certain kinds of use; for instance, if the data said something like "permission to redistribute is granted provided the original copyright statement is retained", then there would be no issue here.

Bill

[Kevin Popejoy]

Note also that "permission" can be granted in a license statement or paragraph that explicitly permits certain kinds of use; for instance, if the data said something like "permission to redistribute is granted provided the original copyright statement is retained", then there would be no issue here.

Bill

Here is the exact wording from David's page containing the numbers in question:

"Feel free to copy this work for desktop use and/or your individual study of piping. You may not republish all or any portions of this work in any form, or distribute it in any form, without permission. You may establish electronic pointers or links to this page. Questions, problems, comments or requests for permission to reprint may be e-mailed to me at daye.1@osu.edu"

Kevin

[Brian Lee]

...and good luck trying to get any form of response.

[Joseph E. Smith]

Note also that "permission" can be granted in a license statement or paragraph that explicitly permits certain kinds of use; for instance, if the data said something like "permission to redistribute is granted provided the original copyright statement is retained", then there would be no issue here.

Bill

Here is the exact wording from David's page containing the numbers in question:

"Feel free to copy this work for desktop use and/or your individual study of piping. You may not republish all or any portions of this work in any form, or distribute it in any form, without permission. You may establish electronic pointers or links to this page. Questions, problems, comments or requests for permission to reprint may be e-mailed to me at daye.1@osu.edu"

Kevin

There you have it. And (sorry Seth) the image will be removed until permission is granted.

***In the future, if anyone plans to post copywritten material on this forum, please obtain permission from the holder of the copyright first.


Thanks,


JES

[billh]

In the meantime the data is still posted here:
http://polarmet.mps.ohio-state.edu/~bdaye/bagpipes.html

Search for 'Harrington' to find the link on that page (the page to which David prefers you link, it seems).

Bill