 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: Ed Lowry
Date: 2014-03-06 09:05
I posted these questions on the thread related to bass clarinet parts, but making a new subject seems to make ore sense. I know there's been copyright discussions before, but I don't think these questions have been answered, and they've been on my mind for some time.
1. I know that in general, if a work was produced before 1923, it is no longer protected by US copyright. Yet I have many pieces written in the 1800s with copyrights attached, e.g. Schumann Fantasiestucke (Verlag, copyright 1986), Weber, 7 Variations (Peters, copyright 1964) just to name two.
Am I violating US copyright law by making xerox copies and distributing them? Or, for that matter, playing them in public without permission of the copyright "owner"? Perhaps I need to cross out all editing done by the publisher, and then copy it?
2. On a related, but different question, what about works produced behind the "Iron Curtain" which, if I understand correctly, could not be copyrighted under US laws for many years? Now that we've resolved our issues with the Soviet Union, etc. ![[grin]](http://test.woodwind.org/clarinet/BBoard/smileys/smilie5.gif) can I reproduce and play them with impunity, at least in the US, or can they now be copyrighted?
.... had I paid more attention in my patents and copyright law school classes, I might know the answers to these questions ... if there are any certain answers!
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: tictactux ★2017
Date: 2014-03-06 12:40
A copyright may be attributed to the work "per se", but also to a specific "rendering" (ie transposition, re-publication with typos fixed etc etc).
To make sure you get a "liberated" copy, check if there's a part available eg in http://www.imslp.org/.
Generally, you may not make a photocopy of a part that says "Copyright greater than (today minus 70 years after the death of its creator)" or "Copyright greater than (today minus 70 years after its first publication)", whichever date is later. (I don't want to debate the various tricks used by copyright owners to extend that copyright beyond these times)
In many countries, while you may buy copyrighted parts, you need a license to perform them in public.
It's always a wise move to ask the publisher first, whenever you encounter a copyright symbol somewhere...
I am not a lawyer, and take notice that I only said what you may NOT do. I don't mean to imply that in all other cases you actually are allowed to.
--
Ben
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: kdk
Date: 2014-03-06 18:33
The answers I've gotten from several people I respect who have researched this (I'm not a copyright lawyer, either, and am passing on information I've been told)
Ed Lowry wrote:
> 1. I know that in general, if a work was produced before
> 1923, it is no longer protected by US copyright. Yet I have
> many pieces written in the 1800s with copyrights attached, e.g.
> Schumann Fantasiestucke (Verlag, copyright 1986), Weber, 7
> Variations (Peters, copyright 1964) just to name two.
>
> Am I violating US copyright law by making xerox copies and
> distributing them? Or, for that matter, playing them in public
> without permission of the copyright "owner"? Perhaps I need to
> cross out all editing done by the publisher, and then copy it?
>
As I understand it, a new copyright for a work that has entered the public domain is only granted if significant changes have been made to the original work. For example, an orchestration of an accompaniment originally published as a piano part (a sonata, the Schumann Fantasiestucke) can be copyrighted - but not the solo part, assuming it wasn't changed. Layout cannot, as I understand it, be copyrighted, so a re-engraving of a PD publication that only makes cosmetic improvements - more white space, larger or smaller staves and noteheads, replacement of French quarter-note rests with German ones, addition of metronome markings, improvements in page turns, etc. - cannot be copyrighted. Publishers often put copyright notices on such re-engravings, but saying it's protected doesn't make the protection enforceable. A grayer area for me is the scholarly edition, which may include extensive error correction and removal of accumulated published traditions added by subsequent editors. I don't think these can be copyrighted because the editor has only tried to reproduce more faithfully what the composer wrote, which is not protected.
> 2. On a related, but different question, what about works
> produced behind the "Iron Curtain" which, if I understand
> correctly, could not be copyrighted under US laws for many
> years? Now that we've resolved our issues with the Soviet
> Union, etc. can I reproduce and play them with impunity,
> at least in the US, or can they now be copyrighted?
As of 1973, when the USSR joined the Universal Copyright Convention, the U.S. recognizes Russian copyrights, which is why pieces by Shostakovitch and Prokofiev that once were PD in this country are now protected. Many must now be rented that before 1973 were sold by re-publishers like Kalmus and Luck's. The excerpts from many of those pieces have disappeared from recent editions of excerpt books and the pieces do not appear on IMSLP.
>
> .... had I paid more attention in my patents and copyright law
> school classes, I might know the answers to these questions ...
> if there are any certain answers!
Depending on when you took those classes, it might not have made much difference. In any case, the copyright law is itself very large and seems to contain enough ambiguities that people much better educated than I am in the copyright law sometimes can't agree on what is and what isn't protected.
Again, these are interpretations I've gotten from other people.
Karl
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Bruno
Date: 2014-03-06 16:06
When the copyright runs out it is usually renewed by the family, or absent family, the publishing house, and is protected by ASCAP (American Society of Composers Authors and Publishers).
Under copyright law performers are required to pay a royalty whenever they perform the work in public, but it is usually ignored by one-time performers until and unless the "ASCAP police" get on it. There is so much small-scale cheating (e.g. YouTube, night clubs, etc) that it's nearly impossible to monitor every single public performance - and in my admittedly limited experience they don't.
Motion pictures, Broadway musicals, classical music venues, etc. where performances are repeated, do submit their royalties.
That's my experience.
B>
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mark Charette
Date: 2014-03-06 17:03
Bruno wrote:
> When the copyright runs out it is usually renewed by the
> family, or absent family, the publishing house, and is
> protected by ASCAP (American Society of Composers Authors and
> Publishers).
>
There isn't a renewal provision anymore.
"Public Law 102-307, enacted on June 26, 1992, amended the copyright law to make renewal automatic and renewal registration optional for works originally copyrighted between January 1, 1964, and December 31, 1977.
...
Public Law 105-298, enacted on October 27, 1998, amended the copyright law to add 20 years to the copyright term."
http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ15.pdf
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
