Dear Richard, Am 10.03.2009 um 09:48 schrieb Richard Brekne: > Bernard > > At this point, I consider my hands more then clean. You, on the > other hand continue to distort things, despite your promise > yesterday on the phone. You promised on the phone yesterday to inform me by email first of what you will post. I don´t see any change of your mind in it regarding your acknowledge of prior art of my work on the matter. > > > Number 1: It was YOU who brought Andre into this discussion a few > years back and not me. I don´t even have to dig into the archives to proove the contrary: I use the philosophical proof of exclusion: I can´t have knowledge about a seminar with you and André alone from myself, were you got some input from him that pushed you somehow onto the rail (your words). This information can only come from you. > You did so to show how I must have gotten the whole idea from you. > Its in the archives and by now you should know that I'm rather good > at digging this stuff up. > > Number 2: I did not this morning confirm anything this morning with > André that is anything else then perfect truth. We did not talk > about you or the P12ths and I have no reason to doubt André's word > about where he learned anything. I know André to be an honorable man. Your attacks can be very subtle: I know that André is indeed a honorable man, no doubt about that. Your statement here is just an attempt to make believe that i have a different opinion about André. > > > Since You've spent the last few days trying to convince everyone how > different my P-12ths approach is to yours one has to wonder what the > frog this is all about to begin with. And if it IS essentially the > same thing... why all the BS about it being different ? Your > software is still quite safe and protected and viable on its own. The concept is the same - We differ by inharmonicity handling. Also repeated uncounted times on the old threads. > > > Every tuner has the right to follow up his/her own leads and develop > their own ideas as they see fit. I have shown quite clearly that my > development was completely independent from you and that the greater > subject matter of P12ths tuning concept which predates your specific > implementation is what has influenced me. Because of this, and > because my own work has been open source and totally non commercial > from day one I am under no legal or moral responsibility to pay more > regard to your work then I already have. Quite the opposite... I've > gone above and beyond whats required of me in both regards. Because > of this, your continued accusations as to proprietary violations are > ridiculous as well you know. Suppose you publish a "new" unequal temperament which later could be prooved to be identical let´s say to the Werckmeister 3 temperament (it doesn´t matter what temperament): Who damages his reputation then? You continuing to insist that your work is proprietary and you have found it by your own or a guy prooving your "new" concept has a prior art? > > > Now, I've done my bit in regard to all this. I've dipped my head to > your prior work in more then appropriate fashion and wish both you > and your software success.... but beyond that I have no > responsibilities of any sort whatsoever to you. Your <<needs>> for > recognition beyond this point are your own affair. > > For my part... this particular tangent discussion is at an end. ..... > > > Cheers > RicB > > > > > >
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC