i have absolutely no idea what points you are raising AFG and no idea what relevance the links you have posted mean.

Do you accept/understand any of the points i made about identifying the author /creator and the intellectual property that is being protected by copyright ?

your question about who is the author of sample based equipment is completely irrelevant.In 1949 did copyright law exist in the way it does today AFG ?????????????????. Is the mellodrome protected by copyright or Patent AFG. Do you even understand the difference between the two ???? ! Chamberlain may have patented his invention but he did not copyright it ! they are completly different concepts. Im am not going to explain the difference to you , i just dont have the patience.

And i honestly dont have any idea what points you are making towards the end about reducing numbers of musicians and fairness.

I cant see any point in your line of reasoning. Perhaps if you made your points first then refered to your links and explained the relevance of them i could make more sense of what you are saying.

Sorry if i am misunderstanding you.