IMSLP:Site development/New copyright tags

I'm doing a complete rewriting of the copyright tagging system, with history and other good stuff. So far I've only done the form (and no actual support for this system), but I would like to ask if the information required for the form is fine (or if you have other features you want to add). Here's a screenshot of it:


Also, I will not be working rigouriously on this rewrite because of an urgent deadline coming up on the 15th. I will try my best to implement the entire mammoth of a feature in the few days following that date. Existing tags will be translated into its equivalency in the new tagging system. --Feldmahler 17:37, 5 November 2007 (EST)

P.S. Even though I won't be working on it until the 15th, please tell me what you think about this, even if you hate it ;) --Feldmahler 17:47, 5 November 2007 (EST)

P.S.2 I've been thinking of including Berne RoST in the tagger. Would that be a good idea? --Feldmahler 23:53, 5 November 2007 (EST)

Feldmahler, what tags do we use in the meanwhile? Like Carolus presumed?--Peter talk 16:45, 9 November 2007 (EST)
Just wondering about the exact definitions here. I assume that:
   * VerifiedEU = PD in Canada and EU
   * VerifiedUS = PD in Canada and US
   * VerifiedUSandEU = PD in Canada, US and EU (This is what the older, plain-vanilla "Verified" tag means, no?)
Carolus is right about the three new tags, but I was planning on making the plain-vanilla just PD in Canada. Another way to do this is equate Verified with VerifiedEU and then manually fix it for composers who died less than 70 years ago. US is more complicated, so I don't know if we can include that in the plain vanilla tag...
Actually, at the moment Carolus and I are in the process of negotiation with PG and PG's lawyers regarding the issue of copyright review and editions. Hopefully we will have a resolution soon (as in, the next week or the week after that; this depends on when we can schedule the conference calls).
One way to avoid having to redo anything is for you to use your free time either for non-copyright review related tasks (publisher information for example), or just to finish real life work that you have to do so that you will be more free when we actually decide on a concrete copyright review policy :) Plus, this will give me time to implement the new copyright tagging system. --Feldmahler 17:02, 9 November 2007 (EST)
OK. Maybe it'd be better that the name of the new Canada-only tag will be different from "Verified", to distinguish the "old", currently Verified files, with the files that will be worked through, so that the tag "Verified" will eventually disappear. Good luck with all the work you have. Peter talk 17:48, 9 November 2007 (EST)
Actually, the new Canada-only tag will be "PDV/NPD/NPD" (see the picture above), with the appropriate colours of course :) --Feldmahler 18:32, 9 November 2007 (EST)
Oh oops. I think I misunderstood what you meant. But yes, I will find a way to distinguish between the old Verified files and the newly tagged files. The easy way would be to just go by modification date, and make a special page that only lists old modification date tags :) --Feldmahler 18:34, 9 November 2007 (EST)
I assume that "year" refers to the year in which a given work became (or becomes) PD in the respective domain. That could be useful in generation of warning tags, etc. For the US, any work published before 1923 without a copyright notice became PD the year it was published. It's the post-1923 works that are more challenging. Those published with a notice from 1881-1907 and before became PD 56 years later at latest and those from 1908-1922 75 years at latest. Don't now if that will help with automating things any, but I thought I'd throw it out. Carolus 00:15, 10 November 2007 (EST)
Yes, "year" does refer to the year on which the work becomes PD. I have introduced this because, as Peter mentioned before, otherwise we would have to go over all the files again for the copyright status in the US and EU. The reason I have not automated the "year" is because it could depend on a variety of factors: composer death date, transcriber death date, date of first publication.
In any case, I think it would be easy, and a good idea, to set up a page explaining the copyright terms for different situations once we have the editions mess sorted out. :) --Feldmahler 09:24, 10 November 2007 (EST)