If you record a chord progression and call it (as in your example) Yesterday, AND the chord progression is for the song Yesterday, you have in fact violated the law.
IANAL, and this
is the internet, but neither the chord progression
nor the title can be copyrighted.
So what law has been violated in your example?
Of course, I'm not so foolish as to test this theory out myself.
I have a book about the business and legal aspects of music law. It's over 600 pages and I did try to find the section that dealt with this. UNsuccessfully.
Essentially, what you say is generally correct. Titles and chord progressions are not copyrightable under most circumstances. All the rock and rollers and blues guys are thankful for that.... the 1-4-5 progression is a standard.
However..... there is a point where the progression can be problematic. When the chord progression to a song is so unique that simply playing the chords with no melody indicates immediately to the listener the song's name.... it can in fact be a copyrightable situation. The argument would be.... do the chords to yesterday amount to that point?
F Em7 A7 Dm Dm/C
Yesterday all my troubles seemed so far away
Bb C7 Bb F C Dm G7 Bb F
Now it looks as though they're here to stay oh I believe in yesterday
[Verse 2]
F Em7 A7 Dm Dm/C
Suddenly I'm not half the man I used to be
Bb C7 Bb F C Dm G7 Bb F
there's a shadow hanging over me oh yesterday came suddenly
[Chorus]
Em7 A7 Dm Dm/C Bb Gm C F
Why she had to go I don't know she wouldn't say
Em7 A7 Dm Dm/C Bb Gm C F
I said something wrong now I long for yesterday
That would be for a jury and judge to decide. Above my pay grade. To reply to the question you posed.... Using this unique chord progression and naming it Yesterday..... I think that's a little too much of a stretch to call it a random musical event. Especially when the timing also falls into place.
If you were on that jury, how would you decide?