“…69-73] (see also [22]) to (17), with the Nevanlinna characteristic replaced by that of Tsuji, then yields (6), where the function a satisfies T(r, a) = S(r, M ). If a is constant then Proposition 3.1 gives (18), so assume that a is non-constant. If z 0 is a pole of f in the upper half-plane, of multiplicity p, then (5) and (6) imply that (10) holds at z 0 , with finitely many choices for the integer p, because the poles of f have bounded multiplicities.…”