> Copyrighted elements of a musical composition can include melody, chord progression, rhythm, and lyrics — anything that reflects a "minimal spark" of creativity and originality.
> Song Titles and Chord Progressions are not copyright protected
> This is true.
[snip]
> Ditto for chord progressions. There must be hundreds of songs that were hits in the ’50s and early ’60s that followed the familiar “ice cream changes” progression of I-vi-IV-V7. Thin “In The Still Of The Night” (another song that shares its title with others), “Donna”, “Silhouettes”, “This Boy” just for starters. Also the chords from the “Pachelbel Canon in D” have been used numerous times. Think “A Whiter Shade Of Pale.”
https://www.buzzfeed.com/reggieugwu/what-the-law-says-about-...
> Copyrighted elements of a musical composition can include melody, chord progression, rhythm, and lyrics — anything that reflects a "minimal spark" of creativity and originality.
https://ask.audio/articles/5-common-beliefs-about-song-copyr...
> Song Titles and Chord Progressions are not copyright protected
> This is true.
[snip]
> Ditto for chord progressions. There must be hundreds of songs that were hits in the ’50s and early ’60s that followed the familiar “ice cream changes” progression of I-vi-IV-V7. Thin “In The Still Of The Night” (another song that shares its title with others), “Donna”, “Silhouettes”, “This Boy” just for starters. Also the chords from the “Pachelbel Canon in D” have been used numerous times. Think “A Whiter Shade Of Pale.”
Does lack of enforcement make something legal?
https://moviecultists.com/can-chord-progressions-be-copyrigh...
> "If a single chord progression were elaborate enough and unconventional enough, it could be protected."
How many possible chord progressions are there?