- 1 OM
- 2 César Franck: Duparc's transcriptions of the Fantasies for Organ
- 3 Suite africaine (Lacôme d'Estalenx, Paul)
- 4 Swabian Dance Song (Reger, Max)
- 5 The Cunning Little Vixen
- 6 Dvorak Operas Complete Edition
- 7 Tragt, blaue Träume (Reger, Max)
- 8 Sonatas for Violin and Clavier, BWV 1014-1019 (Bach, Johann Sebastian)
- 9 Recent Paganini Uploads
- 10 Possible Milhaud project
- 11 Venus and Adonis
- 12 8 Ausgewählte Volkslieder (Reger, Max)
- 13 Finally
- 14 Sinfonia for Cello and Continuo (Pergolesi, Giovanni Battista)
- 15 3 Lieder, Op.4 (Cornelius, Peter)
- 16 Colette Mourey
- 17 RV 521/522
- 18 Missa in D (Bernabei, Giuseppe Antonio)
- 19 Dvorak piano works
- 20 Clara Schumann, Variationen, Op.20
- 21 PLP
- 22 Wiener Urtext Editions - Schubert
- 23 Bad Carolus ;)
Seen the news? :)-- Snailey Talk to Me Email me 16:10, 28 February 2010 (UTC)
- Nice news indeed. 549 titles! Carolus 02:43, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
Bad carolus forgot some Prokofiev ;)-- Snailey Talk to Me Email me 04:16, 7 March 2010 (UTC)
- Well, at least it's now a nice even 550! Carolus 07:25, 7 March 2010 (UTC)
Looking at Homerdundas's list, are we not missing any more prokofiev?-- Snailey Talk to Me Email me 14:47, 7 March 2010 (UTC)
- Don't think so. Carolus 07:38, 8 March 2010 (UTC)
César Franck: Duparc's transcriptions of the Fantasies for Organ
Too late I've recognized that the original compositions are nestled among the publisher's systems – sorry! How shall we proceed? All the best --Ralph Theo Misch 00:52, 1 March 2010 (UTC)
- "3 Pièces pour Grande Orgue" and "6 Pièces..." are the titles where organists search for the Fantaisies - I should have known that :(
Moreover I would have seen then that Friedman's transcription of Prélude, Fugue et Variation  was already existent: . --Ralph Theo Misch 11:54, 1 March 2010 (UTC)
I am somewhat torn about this. On the one hand, our usual procedure is to assign a single work-page for each opus or catalogue number. On the other hand, the groupings were published under the composer's supervision during his lifetime. I think I'll ask P.Davydov (who has much experience with library classifications) what is the best way to go. I copied your post of the Friedman transcription to the 6 Pieces page. Carolus 21:16, 1 March 2010 (UTC) UPDATE: See p. davydov's talk page. We will (eventually) set up separate pages for all individual opus or catalog numbers, plus pages for the collections organized by the composer. We did this for Smetana's Ma Vlast and it seems to have worked nicely. Carolus 05:37, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
having completed the juridical horoscope of this matter, I uploaded Clémandh's piano transcription of No.3 - La Nouba.
I think the notice " *by kind permission of Costallat & Cie..." refers to the original orchestra score as well as to the transcription. Otherwise Clémandh would have made it as an original contribution for SANG UND KLANG. SANG UND KLANG 11 itself is n.d. - the editor, Leo Blech died 1948, in the preface the anniversaries of Brahms and Beethoven in 1927 are mentioned in the past. My oracle: Non PD EU, but PD US ;-) --Ralph Theo Misch 23:30, 1 March 2010 (UTC)
- Yes, Clémandh's piano transcription would be theoretically covered until 2014 in the EU. Probably PD in USA. Definitely PD in Canada. Sometimes, to determine USA status, we must sacrifice a chicken and spread its entrails before a statue of Uncle Sam to get the proper result :)) Carolus 05:31, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
Oh no! - Taylor died in 1966! But I've got an idea... --Ralph Theo Misch 00:48, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
- Yes, he died in 1966 but it's possibly still free in parts of the EU thanks to EU's use of "Rule of the Shorter Term". Canada is more questionable, but how much of the translation did Taylor actually do? That's why a put a "C" for Canada as well. If anyone makes noise, I'll have to pull it down. Carolus 05:29, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
The Cunning Little Vixen
Shouldn't we just get rid of these if they aren't becoming PD anywhere until 2019, in following with our "policy" on such matters? It just looks bad...-- Snailey Talk to Me Email me 03:50, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
- Probably. I'll discuss w/Daphnis. It's the German translation that's locked up in Canada until 2019. The Czech only vocal score is free there, as is the full score (which I think is in Czech only). Carolus 05:27, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
- I thought we weren't considering translations as effecting the copyright status in these cases. This has been the case in the past here, and furthermore the likelihood that this would stand up in court as being a sufficient unique contribution is highly suspect. This type of translation isn't equivalent to literal, prose translations often given in front matter, as you probably know. Those would more clearly be protected, but not these "facilitated" translations. Daphnis 21:12, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
- That's an interesting point. Since one can now translate text literally with software like Babelfish, the whole idea of a translation's originality is indeed subject to question. I think the originality argument cuts to the opposite of the type of translation described, though. It's the literal prose translations whose originality is subject to question. A non-literal, singing translation that took liberties or departed from the strict meaning of the original text would be the one that could conceivably meet the "threshold of originality" bar. So, the question before us is: Just how far does Brod's German translation depart from the original Czech? Was he almost writing a new story in German - loosely based on the original, or was it a word-for-word translation of the original Czech into German? Carolus 23:07, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
- You may have a point with that distinction, however as I recall in the past, literal, especially scholarly translations (ex. Stewart Spencer's monumental English translation of the entire Ring libretto--perhaps the most authentic translation ever produced (even to the point of retaining Wagner's rhyme scheme)), have been defended in courts successfully while translations of the nature in question (poetic translations) don't strive to reconfigure the original text in artful ways. Choosing words that match the original text in syllabic count only isn't as highly regarded a skill or feat as those that strive to maintain or "re-create" the character and flow of the original. I agree that both of these distinctions are highly problematic from a copyright standpoint, and I'm not sure there is a good solution. That being said, I propose that these types of in-score poetic translations, such as our score in question, should be issued a 'C' when the translator's dates fall later than those of original contributors for the region in question. Often times when swimming through these murky waters we have to consider, from a personal standpoint (ie. from those who hold the copyrights), what they'll consider worth defending. The likelihood of someone barking over such a poetic translation is quite slim compared to if we hijacked a scholar's recent translation of the same work. After all, anyone who has half a brain takes very little (if any) stock in these poetic translations--I know I sure don't. And any person who is interested in studying or performing a work in this boat is almost always bound to seek out a literal, honest translation versus the gobbledygook that frequently appears in these vocal scores. Daphnis 01:10, 3 March 2010 (UTC)
- I tend to agree. Let's tag as "C" unless we get barked at, which seems somewhat unlikely. As it stands, only the first three of Janacek's operas will pass the [TB] barrier, unless we can shoot some of the others down for bad notices, etc. Since Janacek is free in the country of origin, they can't file an after-the fact NIE if they blew the notice requirement. Carolus 01:17, 5 March 2010 (UTC)
Agreed. Daphnis 01:23, 5 March 2010 (UTC)
Dvorak Operas Complete Edition
Hello Carolus, I was mistaken, The Jacobin has not 1100 pages, only 700. SNKLHU published the wellknown 2nd together with large parts of the original version. The opera volumes are really big chunks, I could hardly press it on my scanner and also damaged the binding when I bent it, hence only 300 dpi scans.... Unfortunately it seems to have a valid cr notice but I posted it anyway, just to make the Complete Edition a bit more complete :) Hobbypianist 19:54, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
- That's annoying. The 1966 notice is indeed in the correct for and place. Renewal was automatic for everything published 1964 and after. It would take a court challenge to disprove their copyright claim. The [TB] will stay until further notice, sad to say. Thanks for the post anyway. Carolus 23:32, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
my tagging is a little bit vague: The only reference to Otto Junne's publication I've found here . - Best wishes! --Ralph Theo Misch 00:21, 3 March 2010 (UTC)
No transcriber, no publishing date, no copyright notice. I've read the tea leaves. They said: Post away! ;) --Ralph Theo Misch 00:30, 3 March 2010 (UTC)
Recent Paganini Uploads
I was a bit confused with these, not realizing that F.Rothschild was string editor...
- The violin part is blocked as it is not PD in Canada. I misread the preface on this matter, where F.Rothschild states:
- "With the exception of the alternative readings [ossia], especially marked by the author in the Waltz, the original reading of the violin part as laid down by Paganini in the autograph manuscript has been fully retained including his marks for fingering and bowing."
- (except I removed this portion of the preface from the the Piano part).
--so question: If I remove the ossia - can we unblock the violin part?
--another question: since the violin part, is part of the score, shouldn't the score be blocked also, for the same reasons that the violin part is? (I can remove the ossia from here too of course).
--might have to remove the whole work?
- Arranged for Violin and Piano (composer)
- If we assume Mr.Rothschild had significant input to vn part...
- --I guess this one should be deleted for the same reason (violin part is in the piano score)?
Thanks.--Homerdundas 01:56, 3 March 2010 (UTC)
- It looks like the fingerings are actually Paganini's, so I'm treating this as urtext and unblocking the violin parts. Thanks for posting the missing portion of the preface! Carolus 06:12, 3 March 2010 (UTC)
Possible Milhaud project
While I await your reply on the poetic translation issue, I'd like get your thoughts on the possibility of me doing a Milhaud project very similar to that of Stravinsky. All his pre-1923 works I'd try to collect and amass in an archive. He has quite a few that fall into the public domain category, including, according to the Masters catalog, a couple chamber pieces (String Quartets Nos. 8 & 9) that were published in the 30's, vocal, solo piano, and dramatic works. Almost everything through opus 75 was published pre-'23. I wonder if this is something that Sibley may be interested in hosting also. Daphnis 06:14, 4 March 2010 (UTC)
- I expect so. JF was definitely interested in your Stravinsky project. I'm sending him the Stravinsky and Milhaud titles that were included in the OP project, so additional Milhaud titles seems a natural fit. Carolus 01:10, 5 March 2010 (UTC)
Were the present titles in the OP project processed for logos etc? If so, for Stravinsky, can I get those titles to integrate into the Stravinsky archive? And for Milhaud, I'd also like to get them so I can start preparing the project. If Jim is interested in either of this, let me know if you would, please. Thanks much. Daphnis 01:24, 5 March 2010 (UTC)
- Yes, completely stripped of logos, etc. and ready to go. I'm thinking of sending you a package of scores for scanning, send me your current shipping address and I'll throw in a CD of the orchestral parts. Carolus 01:27, 5 March 2010 (UTC)
Funny you should mention that. Check your email. Daphnis 01:33, 5 March 2010 (UTC)
Venus and Adonis
I found a score for John Blow's Venus and Adonis that is in the public domain. I would like to post it to IMSLP, but had a question before doing so. It is from Google Books, and was scanned from the Havard Music Library. It however has a watermark on the bottom of each page saying that it was scanned by Google. Would this be problem for posting it to IMSLP?
In addition, I am working on extracting parts form the score, newly typset in finale. If the score is unable to be posted to IMSLP, would there be a problem posting the parts upon completion. Please let me know
- Hi, Yes the Google logo is definitely a problem. I have the means to remove them here if you wish to post it later on. We already have a number of Google scores here with the logos removed. There is no problem whatever with your part extraction, as the work itself if completely public domain. Carolus 01:13, 5 March 2010 (UTC)
the Swabian Dance Song turned out to be No.7 (Schwäbisches Tanzliedchen) of that work title. But I don't know how to move it without creating a chaos ;( Unfortunately I couldn't find No.1 :(( --Ralph Theo Misch 01:31, 5 March 2010 (UTC)
- Fixed. Carolus 01:41, 5 March 2010 (UTC)
I've seen - thanks a lot! --Ralph Theo Misch 01:43, 5 March 2010 (UTC)
John Walsh...what thinks thou, Carolus Magnus? :)-- Snailey Talk to Me Email me 00:06, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
- Nice addition. This is one of the things that makes this site so interesting from a musicologist's point of view. There's a depth of information not to be found elsewhere. Carolus 01:35, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
- Good work! It would be nice for pages like this that primarily contain factual information to also have source citations for scholarly reference/validation (where possible). Daphnis 01:50, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
Grove's is the main source...-- Snailey Talk to Me Email me 02:35, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
- I added a few bits from Albert Wier's The Macmillan Encyclopedia of Music and Musicians (1938), which often has odd details and dates for obscure composers not found elsewhere. Carolus 02:38, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
- I would suggest we should get in the habit of citing this information. Daphnis 02:39, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
And retroactively for the previous entries? MLA? Which format? If we're going to decide this, we need to make plenty of decisions...and this sounds like a good time.
@Carolus: Thanks!-- Snailey Talk to Me Email me 02:47, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
- The Walsh format looks fine. If noone barks, I'll add the Grove's citation to a few of the other pages to which I've added bits from Grove's...-- Snailey Talk to Me Email me 02:48, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
- Chicago is the generally accepted format for Arts and Humanities, and is used almost exclusively in the musical world. Daphnis 02:49, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
Sure. So we should add a note somewhere to standardize...what about headings?-- Snailey Talk to Me Email me 02:51, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
- I believe things like this should be included in the IMSLP style guide, and I furthermore think that Chicago style should be the standard for the entire site, again when applicable. I'll leave other matters to you, Mr. Snailey. Daphnis 02:54, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
OK....I say that the system that is vaguely in place on the walsh page is fine...but...how abuot just having a separate level two heading at the end called "Sources Cited"?
Carolus, there's also a tag for the references; you can find it on wikipedia-- Snailey Talk to Me Email me 02:56, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
- The general hierarchy and organization can be found almost in full on the Breitkopf und Härtel page. The only level 2 item missing appears to be "Imprints", which can be very useful in dating a particular score. I'm fine with putting sources at the bottom as a level two. Yes, I was going to go to Wikipedia later to see how they did those tags. Carolus 03:00, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
OK...I was a bit impetuous...there is a cornucopia of templates that Wikipedia has that we would need to import...wow...
I'll start citing some other publishers that I worked on.-- Snailey Talk to Me Email me 03:07, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
- Complete Breitkopf overhaul...check it out...-- Snailey Talk to Me Email me 03:56, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
I'm using Chicago....-- Snailey Talk to Me Email me 04:04, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
- Looks quite nice. What does Chicago say about handling the links? (I have only a pre-internet book here) Carolus 04:08, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
No link, just URL...as far as I can tell...-- Snailey Talk to Me Email me 04:09, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
- Yep, just plugged it into Citation Machine.-- Snailey Talk to Me Email me 04:12, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
OK, we probably need to type up some sort of standardization page. For starters, where would it go, and what would it be called?-- Snailey Talk to Me Email me 04:46, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
- Probably in the same place that our style guide and explanation of page hierarchy is located. Of course. that entire section might be in need of re-organizing also! Carolus 04:49, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
That, however, is under the score submission guide. Perhaps we need some ancillary documentation guide?-- Snailey Talk to Me Email me 04:52, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
- Good point. It's not really part of score submission. How about under "Historical Publication Info"? We could call the page "Publisher page - style manual". Carolus 04:53, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
Sure! Some things to include:
- Plate number table info etc.
- Templates, categories to include
- Cite your sources! :)
- etc.-- Snailey Talk to Me Email me 04:58, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
- That looks like a good basic outline. The Breitkopf page is probably the most complete of all the publisher pages, but I'll look over some others to see if there's something else to be added. Carolus 05:02, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
Music Publishers/Manual of Style.-- Snailey Talk to Me Email me 15:15, 7 March 2010 (UTC)
- Philidor-- Snailey Talk to Me Email me 21:04, 29 March 2010 (UTC)
Hi Carolus, I couldn't find out anything about Joseph Schmid. Moreover Schmid is a common name in Germany (Schmidt, Schmied, Schmitt...).
I don't know, if it really is a reissue - at worldcat I only found "München: Wunderhorn-Verlag". Regards from --Ralph Theo Misch 20:32, 7 March 2010 (UTC)
- I found he was born in 1868. Could not find a death date. The reference with his birth date was published in 1938, so he probably lived until the 1940s. Carolus 07:36, 8 March 2010 (UTC)
Ha! A composer from Munich. He died in 1945. --Ralph Theo Misch 19:07, 8 March 2010 (UTC)
Hi Carolus, is it an old hat or a discovery? - In 1922 the editor (a friend of Cornelius) found two further songs of that opus, which Cornelius mentioned in a letter to his (Cornelius') sister (Max Hasse in the preface). He further points out that he unfortunately couldn't find No.3 ("Dich lieb ich"). When I searched for this opus, there always appears: 3 Lieder. If Hasse is right (and why shouldn't he), I would suggest the following work title (according to Hasse): Liebeslieder (Love Songs), Op.4. Regards from --Ralph Theo Misch 00:42, 16 March 2010 (UTC)
- A discovery for sure. Liebeslieder, Op.4 seems like the way to go. (I doubt Cornelius included the English translation in his original title). Thanks for the fine upload (as ussual). Carolus 00:48, 16 March 2010 (UTC)
If it is usefull, I could try to make a brief summary of the preface (next days). --Ralph Theo Misch 01:09, 16 March 2010 (UTC)
Hi Carolus. I've just sent a message (in french) to Colette Mourey and some contribution guidelines. I hope this will save some editing time. Best reagrds, --Matthieu 11:12, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
- Much appreciated. Tell her about using the different Creative Commons licenses also. The plain "attribution" allows the Ebay bots to burn her work to CDs and sell it. She should use a minimum of the Non-commercial or Share Alike versions to keep that from happening. Carolus 06:00, 19 March 2010 (UTC)
- Another thing: She really should stop describing her items as "PDF". It's quite redundant as the type of file automatically appears on the right side of each file entry. The parts she uploaded for her requiem are a complete mess and I frankly to do have the spare time to spend 2 hours fixing them up to appear in an intelligible format. Parts should be for the complete work - not a separate part for each movement. Her file names are needlessly long as well. She also should understand that she is the publisher and that the English word "editor" is not exactly equivalent to the French "editeur." I will delete the files she's uploaded for the requiem so she can upload again when they are 1) combined into one file per part for the complete work, and 2) correctly described. Thanks, Carolus 20:58, 21 March 2010 (UTC)
- I sent a quick descriptors message that should alleviate the worst of it...we can't seem too critical all at once...-- Snailey Talk to Me Email me 22:06, 21 March 2010 (UTC)
I agree and am perfectly happy to have her works here. She just needs to take a look at how it's done for the Mozart Requiem, for example. Once she gets the routine down, she'll be fine. Carolus 22:08, 21 March 2010 (UTC)
- I sent her a new and more explicit message in french. She seems to have a big problem with computers, nevertheless she has to follow the minimal rules. If you need a translation of my message, please feel free to ask.--Matthieu 10:32, 22 March 2010 (UTC)
Thanks very much. We're happy to have her work here and we're not mad at her. You might mention to her again that the minimal Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 she has been using allows the "Wildcat Entrepreneurs" on E-Bay to copy and sell her work without telling her. That's why I like to see composers use at least the "share-alike" or "non-commercial" versions. That at least allows us to make a complaint to E-Bay. Carolus 05:25, 23 March 2010 (UTC)
I saw that you moved the Concerto for 2 Violins from RV 521 to RV 522. However, the SLUB site clearly says the piece is RV 521. Furthermore, RV 522 is equivalent to Op.3 Nr.8 which I personally own as a Dover print and its definitely another piece than the manuscripts we have here at RV 521. --BoccaccioTalk Email 22:11, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
- I should have known better than to trust the character who complained that it was 522. Thanks. We'll change it back. Carolus 05:57, 19 March 2010 (UTC)
Hello Carolus, before I continue scanning, I would like to wait until you've given it your blessing. Sorry - but scanning and cleaning those "scraps of paper" is extremely time-consuming. --Ralph Theo Misch 00:47, 19 March 2010 (UTC)
- I see that they did not bother with the requisite notice to secure US copyright. Looks like they are most likely free in the USA and have been tagged accordingly. Nice work on the clean-up. Carolus 01:35, 21 March 2010 (UTC)
Dvorak piano works
Hello Carolus, I'm a bit unsure about the US status of the Eclogues and 2 Little Pearls. Al least the edition the works are scanned from seems to have valid cr notices for these works (which correspond with the dates given at the Antonín_Dvořák_-_Complete_Works_Edition page.) Since you've tagged the already available scores V for USA, will my versions also be "free" then :)? Hobbypianist 17:16, 20 March 2010 (UTC)
- If the valid notices are after 1963, they could potentially be locked up in the [TB] jail because of their US status. Renewals of items issued before 1964 are extremely rare, and just about everything has been reprinted by Kalmus, Masters, or Kalmus/Alfred. Another thing is that Supraphon did nor consistently issue things with the required notices until the mid-1970s. Sometimes the original printing of an item from after 1963 did not have the required notice, which appeared only when the title was re-issued in the 1970s or 1980s. So, I'll have to be checking the Masters, Kalmus and Kalmus/Alfred catalogs to see if they picked up one of those 1960s items lacking a notice. No chance of "restoration" on those as they are free in the EU anyway.
- The Eclogues appear to have been first issued in 1973, so I expect they had a vaild notice from the start. They are not found in the reprint catalogs, either. Thank you very much for finding out the actual date of issue of these late volumes. I noticed that some of the items we had from the MIT archive had no indication of the date of issue, so I just blithely went along and assumed they were issued in the 1950s and 1960s (and thus free in the USA). So, while it's not good that some of these are locked up in [TB] jail, the fact remains that they need to be so and your correct information about their first issue at least prevents their US agent from having cause to make trouble for us. Carolus 01:42, 21 March 2010 (UTC)
Clara Schumann, Variationen, Op.20
Hello Carolus, do you know the publisher etc.:, ? - I would like to upload it, but don't know, if it's PD. Thanks! --Ralph Theo Misch 01:18, 23 March 2010 (UTC)
- Not for those two. They are both G. Henle scores. Henle has been very clever with respect to copyright. Even though the editions are labeled "urtext", they always include fingerings. So, they very possibly do not fall under the EU's urtext provision (30 years from publication at most), but instead are possibly eligible for a full 70pma of the editor. Of course, they're always careful about the notice, etc. for the USA. Can't touch them, really. You'd have to ask a German copyright attorney to know for sure, but they might even be protected there for 70 years after the death of the last surviving contributor. Carolus 04:16, 23 March 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for your reply! And again I've learned something. --Ralph Theo Misch 23:57, 23 March 2010 (UTC)
Some new ideas:
- Faure: Complete Song Cycles
- Berlioz: Les Nuits d'ete (piano and orchestra versions)...amazing that Dover let that go out of print...
- Palestrina's Pope Marcellus Mass and the Lamentations of Jeremiah
- Basically, make sure it's a wide group in addition to rare.-- Snailey Talk to Me Email me 15:22, 23 March 2010 (UTC)
- Also, my copy of the Dvorak Op. 72 is missing the A♭ Bell in the instrumentation. :)-- Snailey Talk to Me Email me 17:36, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
Wiener Urtext Editions - Schubert
Well, I have made a glance to the Forums, now, can I ask you some questions?
- Wich copyright laws should I follow? Until now I thought that the Canadian ones were the only that applied here. Well, in fact I had never heard of "Project Petrucci, LLC" nor there was any link with the US.
- Here is a Quote from the "Public Domanin" page:
- Because the two main IMSLP servers are physically hosted in Canada (one at Montreal and the other at Toronto), IMSLP follows Canadian copyright laws, which may differ from your country.
- It is an Urtext Edition, why is not PD? If it is something related with David Oistrakh, I can delete his fingerings manually.
- May I upload the rest of Sonatas? I have scanned all the piano parts.
- How long will this Block last?
- Why the limit date for the US PD is always 1923? Shouldn't it change? I mean, as years pass, shouldn't it become 1924, 1925... As it happens with Canadian laws?
9:37, 27 March 2010 (UTC)
- Hello Guifre,
- Primarily, you should follow Canada's law. However, we also have to pay very close attention to USA status as our legal address is in the USA.
- Because of the USA situation - where courts have not directly addressed the urtext issue - urtext editions issued after 1922 with a valid copyright notice might be blocked. Those issued after 1963 with a valid notice will certainly be blocked. Most of the editions issued by Muzyka and in other Eastern bloc countries failed to meet the notice requirement under US law, which was in effect until March 1, 1989. Urtext editions issued in Western Europe nearly all have the required notice. Items issued with a notice from 1923-1963 also were required to have a renewal application filed after 28 years. We have no way to check renewals for those issued between 1923 and 1950. Renewals for items published 1951-1963 are online and can be checked. Despite all this, US courts offer better protection from claims made by EU publishers (like Universal) than those in Canada.
- I don't recommend you upload these as they will be blocked for the forseeable future.
- Until there is a court ruling on the urtext issue, the block will have to remain in place, unfortunately.
- US Copyright is very complicated. Items first published between 1923 and 1977 are potentially under copyright for 95 years. The first year the date will move forward again (assuming Disney does not bribe the legislature to extend it as they did in 1998) is 2019. However, things issued after 1922 are not always protected, as notice and renewal requirements may not have been met, and restoration under the GATT/TRIPS amendments may not have been applied for - in the case of urtext editions, this is especially true as a number were not eligible for restoration as they were already public domain in their country of origin. (See what I mean about complicated?)
- Best Regards,
- Carolus 08:29, 28 March 2010 (UTC)
Thank you very much for your explanations!
Here in Catalonia we are always complaining about the Spanish General Authors Society, but in America the situation is much worse!!
07:50, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
Bad Carolus ;)
Appears to have forgotten the Kovanschina Overture and A Life for the Czar in the OM Project :).
Also, I somehow mis-uploaded the Mozart Piano Concerto No. 17; we need horn parts, not and extra set of oboe parts :).
And does OM have the Debussy Petite Suite? That also seems to be missing (See Horndude's talk page, from whence I'm getting this).-- Snailey Talk to Me Email me 20:20, 29 March 2010 (UTC)
- Worldcat says OM has the Petite suite too...have fun! :)-- Snailey Talk to Me Email me 20:21, 29 March 2010 (UTC)
Petite Suite was orchestrated by Henri Büsser (d.1973), therefore not free in Canada. My mistake on Mussorgsky and Glinka - will upload this evening. (Thought I'd done it already!) I'll also add the Horns for Mozarrt PC 17. Carolus 23:55, 29 March 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks a lot.-- Snailey Talk to Me Email me 17:36, 30 March 2010 (UTC)