User talk:Maciejzolnowski

Dear Maciejzolnowski!
We're sorry to have deleted your upload, but your score was not submitted properly. Please do not use the "upload file" link in the left sidebar to upload scores! If you upload scores like this, no one will be able to use your submission! Please read the quick guide to learn how to correctly submit scores. A longer explanation on this can be found in the manual. More details and other ways to use the site can be found at the Contributor Portal.
We look forward to future submissions!
Cheers,
KGill talk email 15:01, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

Contents

Carl Stalling

Hi Maciej. Unfortunately, the two works you uploaded by him had to be deleted, because they are under copyright in virtually the entire world. You may wish to see this page for information on copyright law as it applies to IMSLP. Thanks, KGill talk email 14:15, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

Creative Commons Licenses, etc.

Dear Composer or Copyright Owner,

Welcome to IMSLP/Petrucci Music Library! As a composer or other copyright proprietor, please take time to carefully review the Creative Commons and Performance Restricted licenses including the full licenses in PDF format. Generally speaking, the best version to employ for new works is either the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 4.0 or the Performance Restricted Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0. These allow for free downloading of the items you post, yet prohibits anyone who downloads the files from IMSLP from selling the files (on Ebay, for example), or from giving public performances on an explicitly commercial basis, making recordings of the work without written permission in advance from you, the composer and copyright owner. However, if you are affiliated with a performing rights society such as SOCAN (Canada), ASCAP, BMI or SESAC (USA), SACD, SACEM or SEAM (France), SABAM (Belgium), GEMA (Germany), PRS (UK), SGAE (Spain), SIAE (Italy), Artisjus (Hungary), ZAIKS (Poland), IPRS (India), JASRAC (Japan), or any of the myriad of similar agencies present in this Wikipedia listing, please note that at least some of these agencies refuse to honor the Creative Commons licenses. You should therefore seriously consider using one of the several IMSLP Performance Restricted Licenses for any works posted here if you are affiliated with a performance rights society.

For those uploading the first time, please remember choose the menu option "Add Your Own Composition" when uploading your original works (even if they are scans of manuscripts or printouts), "Add Your Own Arrangement" or "(Re)Typeset" when uploading new arrangements, and "Add Your Own Edition" or "(Re)Typeset" when uploading new editions of public domain works. As it is normally assumed that composers and arrangers have edited their own work, please leave the "Editor" field empty unless another person has actually edited your work (in which case their name should be inserted). Note also that the English term "Editor" is not the equivalent of the French editeur or Italian editore. "Editor" refers to the person who reviewed and corrected the piece, while the French and Italian words are closer to the English word "publisher". In the "Publisher" field, please use your own full legal name, as making your scores and sound files available for free download on this site constitutes "publication" under the laws of most countries in the world. (Note that this is done automatically when using the new upload tools). Please do not list your works as "public domain" as it is not legally possible for your works to be fully public domain under the 'moral rights' provisions of many copyright statutes around the world. Composers and other copyright owners should be aware that Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 is very similar to public domain as it allows for the unrestricted copying, performance (live and broadcast) and recording of the work (including explicitly commercial use) at no charge, with no compensation or royalties payable to the composer or copyright owner for such commercial exploitation. Note also that the all of the above licenses are considered to be IRREVOCABLE once a file has been uploaded under the lawful copyright owner's authorization.

PS: As long as you have not actually inserted a particular Creative Commons license in the PDF file itself, you are free to change the license after upload to something more suitable. However, any restrictions under an updated license are only applicable to copies of the files downloaded after the date of amendment. Copies downloaded before amendment date are likely subject to the original license terms, so please choose carefully. Composers are also encouraged to make use of our new template {{NoPerf}}, which automatically places works into a new category - Unperformed Works. To add this template to your pages, simply copy and paste the little template above (curly brackets and all) into the "First Performance" field of the "General Information" section on all work pages.

Best Wishes,


Carolus 04:02, 18 July 2011 (UTC) (IMSLP Copyright Admin)

PS: For additional and more detailed explanation, please visit our Composer Portal page.


Kwartety Japoński I

Hi Maciejzolnowski. You said that there is only one performer in the recording of this piece. Just to clarify, are you the only performer? Respectfully, Emery 13:58, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

Lady Gaga

Copyright Violation: Stefani Germanotta aka "Lady Gaga"
Red copyright.png


Please DO NOT add works by Stefani Germanotta aka "Lady Gaga".
Reason: You appear to have arranged music of Stefani Germanotta, which is quite illegal without permission in writing from the composer or her designated agents. We are therefore deleting these items at once. If this is somehow not the case, or if you can actually provide written permission for your arrangements, please post again and provide the required permission. Thanks, Carolus 06:13, 30 November 2011 (UTC) (IMSLP Copyright Admin)

Please visit this page to familiarise yourself with the restrictions on uploads to this website.

{{Template:CopyVio | composer name | reason}}



"Fair use and parody

Producers or creators of parodies of a copyrighted work have been sued for infringement by the targets of their ridicule, even though such use may be protected as fair use. These fair use cases distinguish between parodies (using a work in order to poke fun at or comment on the work itself) and satires (using a work to poke fun at or comment on something else). Courts have been more willing to grant fair use protections to parodies than to satires, but the ultimate outcome in either circumstance will turn on the application of the four fair use factors.

In Campbell v Acuff-Rose Music Inc[17] Supreme Court recognized parody as a fair use, even when done for profit. Roy Orbison's publisher, Acuff-Rose Music Inc, had sued 2 Live Crew in 1989 for their use of Orbison's "Oh, Pretty Woman" in a mocking rap version with altered lyrics. The Supreme Court viewed 2 Live Crew's version as a ridiculing commentary on the earlier work, and ruled that when the parody was itself the product rather than used for mere advertising, commercial sale did not bar the defense. The Campbell court also distinguished parodies from satire, which they described as a broader social critique not intrinsically tied to ridicule of a specific work, and so not deserving of the same use exceptions as parody because the satirist's ideas are capable of expression without the use of the other particular work.

A number of appellate decisions have recognized parody as a protected fair use, including both the Second (Leibovitz v Paramount Pictures Corp) and Ninth Circuits (Mattel v Walking Mountain Productions). Most recently, in Suntrust v Houghton Mifflin, a suit was brought unsuccessfully against the publication of The Wind Done Gone, which reused many of the characters and situations from Gone with the Wind, but told the events from the point of view of the slaves rather than the slaveholders. The Eleventh Circuit, applying Campbell, recognized that The Wind Done Gone was a protected parody, and vacated the district court's injunction against its publication." Wikipedia

So it was just Fair use and music (classroom use / scholarship) parody of fugue: 70% of my work.

"§ 107. Limitations on exclusive rights: Fair use How Current is This? Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 106 and 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright. In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include— (1) the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes; (2) the nature of the copyrighted work; (3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and (4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work. The fact that a work is unpublished shall not itself bar a finding of fair use if such finding is made upon consideration of all the above factors." <http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode17/usc_sec_17_00000107----000-.html>