Yes! If you can't tell a difference between a true Mickey Mouse and its (slightly different) clone, and yet the other is not allowed by law due to being not sufficiently different work, then I would say the guys who just aren't sufficiently different from Bach should not be subject of copyright.
The truth is, copyright on interpretation is about the same category as copyright on a work of a plumber in my apartment. I understand that's how some people make money, though, so it's painful to change.
The truth is, copyright on interpretation is about the same category as copyright on a work of a plumber in my apartment. I understand that's how some people make money, though, so it's painful to change.