Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

> Forums Rules

A shortened version of the Forums Rules is given below. The full version can be found here.

By maintaining a user account and by posting to these forums, you hereby agree to abide by these rules.

FORUMS RULES - A SNAPSHOT
- Stay safe - protect your privacy and respect the privacy of others
- No abusive, offensive or aggressive postings
- No insults or personal attacks
- No foul language
- No trolling
- No inappropriate or illegal material
- No advertising (including "For Sale" or "Wanted" adverts)
- No crossposting
- No forum spamming
- No defamatory comments
- Avoid using jargon, abbreviations or "text talk"

2 Pages V  1 2 >  
 Reply to this topicStart new topic
> Copyright - Editions And Transpositions?, who owns the copyright?
sarah-flute
post Jun 19 2006, 08:18 PM
Post #1


Unregistered
Hey folks

I just made a recording of a piece by Carl Nielsen, who died in 1931... BUT... the piece has been edited and, crucially, tranposed... it hasn't been changed in anyway, the whole thing has just been put up a minor third... of the two editors, one I have not heard of, one is James Galway who (unless I missed something) ain't dead yet.

Is this piece OK to put up on the recording site/my website, or not??
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
crazy cow
post Jun 19 2006, 08:39 PM
Post #2


Unregistered
Ooooh...you'll have to ask katyjay! I wouldn't have thought that a transposition would give you the copyright, otherwise anyone could just claim copyright to pieces that they essentially didn't write, but I'm not that brilliant with things like this! Personally, I think the copyright should be the composers and not the arrangers, unless it's a very different arrangement, for example many of the Eva Cassidy arrangements, but then I suppose it may be hard to draw the line...
Sorry I can't be much use!
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
sarah-flute
post Jun 19 2006, 08:40 PM
Post #3


Unregistered
That's OK - I tend to think the same as you, but am also similarly unsure about whether I am right!!
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
katyjay
post Jun 19 2006, 08:41 PM
Post #4


Unregistered
Sorry Crazy Cow and Sarah-Flute, katyjay doesn't know offhand. And at the moment I can't find the reference.

Gut reaction is that it should be OK, but hold fire until I'm sure, if you please!
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
sarah-flute
post Jun 19 2006, 08:42 PM
Post #5


Unregistered
OK, thanks KJ - yes, I am going to be careful!! Don't want to land YAP in stick! (IMG:style_emoticons/default/blink.gif) (IMG:style_emoticons/default/ohmy.gif) (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
crazy cow
post Jun 19 2006, 08:45 PM
Post #6


Unregistered
QUOTE(katyjay @ Jun 19 2006, 09:41 PM) *

Sorry Crazy Cow and Sarah-Flute, katyjay doesn't know offhand.

(IMG:style_emoticons/default/ohmy.gif)
(IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Rink
post Jun 20 2006, 07:52 AM
Post #7


Unregistered
You'd need to find out who (if anyone) owns the copyright for the composition. Just because the composer has been dead for a while doesn't mean that noone owns the copyright.

In theory, if the piece has fallen into public domain then you can distribute your own edition without any problems. In practice its a little more complicated.

But also bare in mind that unless you're selling your edition then its highly unlikely that anyone would give a monkey's about you putting your version up for download.

If I remember the address of the two big organisations for buying rights to use other people's music then I'll post them.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
scarpia
post Jun 20 2006, 08:16 AM
Post #8


Unregistered
As a rule of thumb, copyright runs out 75 years after the death of the composer. However, a publisher may still own the copyright after this.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
mrbouffant
post Jun 20 2006, 08:40 AM
Post #9


Unregistered
QUOTE(scarpia @ Jun 20 2006, 09:16 AM) *

As a rule of thumb, copyright runs out 75 years after the death of the composer. However, a publisher may still own the copyright after this.


It's 70 years in the UK.
The publisher can only own copyright to the _edition_ and this lapses after a shorter period..
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
purple viola
post Jun 20 2006, 09:10 AM
Post #10


Unregistered
As Mr B says the UK copyright lasts for 70 years from the end of the calendar year in which the last remaining author of the work dies.

For typographical arrangements of published editions in the UK, copyright lasts for
25 years from the end of the calendar year in which the work was first published. This is the way that publishers can ensure that old works remain protected by copyright.

You can check about copyright issues here and here.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Rink
post Jun 20 2006, 09:49 AM
Post #11


Unregistered
QUOTE(mrbouffant @ Jun 20 2006, 09:40 AM) *

The publisher can only own copyright to the _edition_ and this lapses after a shorter period..

Not necessarily. The publisher *can* own the copyright for anything - they're a legal entity as any other. But they wouldn't normally unless they'd bought it for some reason.

The copyright can be extended beyond the 70/75 years of an author's death. Since Purple Viola posted that link, I'll use the example offered there:
The copyright for JM Barrie’s work Peter Pan, was due to expire in 1987 in the UK, but an amendment to the 1988 Copyright Designs and Patents Act (instigated by Lord Callaghan) was passed to allow the copyright to run indefinitely in the UK.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
mrbouffant
post Jun 20 2006, 09:51 AM
Post #12


Unregistered
QUOTE(Rink @ Jun 20 2006, 10:49 AM) *

The copyright for JM Barrie’s work Peter Pan, was due to expire in 1987 in the UK, but an amendment to the 1988 Copyright Designs and Patents Act (instigated by Lord Callaghan) was passed to allow the copyright to run indefinitely in the UK.


Surely that was a very specific case to ensure that GOSH continued to receive the funds generated by the work still being in copyright. Can you provide any other examples, especially in the field of published music?
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Rink
post Jun 20 2006, 09:59 AM
Post #13


Unregistered
QUOTE(mrbouffant @ Jun 20 2006, 10:51 AM) *

Surely that was a very specific case to ensure that GOSH continued to receive the funds generated by the work still being in copyright. Can you provide any other examples, especially in the field of published music?

They changed the law to allow it. The law (as far as I know) doesn't actually mention Peter Pan by name; its a legal technique that can be applied for. But I'd imagine will often be denied.

More examples? Erm... if memory serves the other two biggest examples of this are Mickey Mouse and Happy Birthday (the song - which is actually copyright - hence Radio 1 on many occassions complaining when people have sang it on air since they need to pay a royalty when that happens).

Edit: Apologies - in the case of Peter Pan it is specifically written into the 1988 act. But the legal process does allow for anyone to make this application to the courts.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
mrbouffant
post Jun 20 2006, 10:12 AM
Post #14


Unregistered
Regarding Happy Birthday To You:

http://www.unhappybirthday.com/

LOL

This mentions the extensions, but mostly in the context of the US who are barking mad when it comes to such things and like nothing more than a lawyer fest at any given opportunity.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Rink
post Jun 20 2006, 10:27 AM
Post #15


Unregistered
QUOTE(mrbouffant @ Jun 20 2006, 11:12 AM) *

This mentions the extensions, but mostly in the context of the US who are barking mad when it comes to such things and like nothing more than a lawyer fest at any given opportunity.

Hahahah. True.

But by agreement many of the copyright laws are covered internationally. I doubt the Walt Disney corporation had to apply to every single country for an extension on ownership of Mickey Mouse. But I think there are still some countries who don't have this agreement and Mickey is probably public domain.

Edit: BTW Thanks for the link - it linked off to ASCAP who are a pretty good resource for searching for who might own the copyright on a song. There are other bodies but its a good start. http://www.ascap.com/index.html

Edit2: There's lots listed for Carl Neilson - http://www.ascap.com/ace/search.cfm?reques...s_pp=20&start=1
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
« Next Oldest · General Music Forum · Next Newest »
 

2 Pages V  1 2 >
Reply to this topicStart new topic

 

Display Mode: Standard · Switch to: Linear+ · Switch to: Outline

Track this topic · Email this topic · Print this topic · Subscribe to this forum

Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 25th May 2013 - 01:50 PM