Klarinet Archive - Posting 000915.txt from 1999/11

From: Oliver Seely <oliver@-----.EDU>
Subj: RE: [kl] Asking for Help from the list
Date: Tue, 23 Nov 1999 15:48:33 -0500

At 11:22 AM 11/23/99 -0800, Kevin wrote:

>It's difficult to say what notes are Mozart's and what notes are
>the editors'. Remember, for the Mozart concerto there is no urtext -- since
>it was originally written for basset clarinet, any "clarinet" edition has a
>lot of notes that clearly weren't written by Mozart. Someone else is the
>"author" and can claim the copyright.

Let's say that someone else would like to say that he is the author and
would like to claim the copyright. Today with the ability to transpose with
a keystroke, claiming that a transposed version is a "new edition" with
sufficient creativity demonstrated to be a copyrighted work is going to
be a bit of a stretch. What I've seen so far with the works that I've
sequenced for my Web page is that even that amount of work doesn't
go into a lot of "new editions" which have a copyright statement and
the other draconian warnings connected to them.

After I did Mozart's K.452 for my Web page I had an opportunity to look
at a copy of the original manuscript. I think that I xeroxed it from
a microfilm. Can't remember now. Anyway, I went through the whole
first movement comparing it to my Finale file which I took from a "new
copyrighted edition." Notewise, dynamics-wise, articulation-wise, I
couldn't see any changes. It isn't surprising because editors and
publishers used to pride themselves on being faithful to the composer's
intentions. That I took my notes from the copyrighted work doesn't matter
a whit if Feist Publications vs. Rural Telephone Services (1991) holds up.
Sandra Day O'Conner held that the names in the phone book are not
copyrightable, so Feist Publications could copy them anyway it wished.
I would hold that Mozart's notes are not copyrightable, so it doesn't matter
where I take them from.

There are a lot of folks in commercial publishing who make extravagant
claims as to what they own. I get a distinct feeling with the WWW that
there's going to be a big shakedown on the whole matter of attempted
protection of public domain material over the next couple of decades.
Don't know how it's going to go but I hope that I'll be able to quote
the Bible without having to pay a license fee.

And even if I'm wrong on all of the foregoing, it will only whet a lot of our
appetites to ferret out all of the autographs and old copyrighted works
which have passed into the public domain to make public domain copies
of all of them once and for all. This damnable matter of public domain
material being copyrightable seems to me to be a little like Dracula
continuing to try to rise again from his coffin. Keep that wooden stake
in his heart folks! And the cross raised in front of you! 8-)

Oliver

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsubscribe from Klarinet, e-mail: klarinet-unsubscribe@-----.org
Subscribe to the Digest: klarinet-digest-subscribe@-----.org
Additional commands: klarinet-help@-----.org
Other problems: klarinet-owner@-----.org