Photocopying music for pupils Options

[RoseRodent]

However, if it is a new edition (i.e. printed within the last 25 years) this does not apply.

To clarify, it needs to have been published over 25 years ago - reprints of old editions don't gain a new copyright, because there's no creative act involved, and this is why Dover Scores have long been able to reprint old editions and sell them cheaply.

(The work of editors and engravers both count as creative acts for this purpose.)

No, but for further complication, a new edition with anything that has changed and has a separate copyright date goes from the second date. You need to see the difference between "Copyright 1970, reprinted in 1994 by Jones Books" - copyright has expired - and "First Published 1970, this edition 1994, Copyright 1994 Jones Books" - copyright enforced for 25 years from 1994. The new edition must have "material changes" inside it, not just a new cover, so if it's identical to your old copy it's a reprint and they have just tried to get a new copyright through the back door. If it has been redone inside, e.g. new pictures of kids wearing more up to date clothing instead of kids with mullets in shorts and aron sweaters then it's a new copyright... even if the music is the same and you don't copy any of the images!!!

Want to blow your brains out yet? (IMG:style_emoticons/default/laugh.gif)

[dolce@piano]

Well explained, Roserodent.

If you look inside most school text books, for instance, there is a list of re-print dates and the occasional new edition date because the re-prints are exactly that, just an extra run of copies printed because they're run out in the book shops (hence no new copyright) whereas the new edition is a revamping of the book and involves new work - new design, new exercises, new lay-out, new examples whatever - so the publisher has a new copyright protection.

.

[porilo]

As far as I know there is no copyright on scales, otherwise somebody would be a multi-millionaire as surely these are the most played "pieces"! (IMG:style_emoticons/default/laugh.gif) I tend to print scales myself which I have already typed using a music software program, so I can photocopy them as much as I like and so can anyone else who wants to.

[dotted quaver]

So what's the position regarding candidates taking an ABRSM piano exam and going into the actual exam with handwritten copies of their exam pieces? Surely that can't be legal?

[sbhoa]

So what's the position regarding candidates taking an ABRSM piano exam and going into the actual exam with handwritten copies of their exam pieces? Surely that can't be legal?

Copying is copying.

[jacobvaneyck]

Legally the answer is never photocopy unless it is covered by the Fair Use code, though lots of people do and it seems tacitly accepted in some circumstances.

I'm more interested in the position with imslp as even if the composer is out of copyright, surely the edition scanned in is copyrighted and still sold by online retailers.

[dolce@piano]

So what's the position regarding candidates taking an ABRSM piano exam and going into the actual exam with handwritten copies of their exam pieces? Surely that can't be legal?

Why not ?
If the piece is by a composer who has been dead over 70 years, you should be able to go in with any copy you like.
There is absolutely no reason why a copy by the ABRSM or Peters or Oxford or whoever is worth more than your copy - they haven't any special rights over the piece - the Mozart belongs to you as much as it belongs to them.
(This does NOT apply to more recent composers or if you have slavishly copied out their edition, with every little mark).

Everyone should remember that the 'public domain' is a wonderful, powerful concept.

After all, when Elgar died I assume he left a house, a bank acocunt, whatever. Maybe he made beautiful jewellery in his sparetime. No matter - all that passes along the family and never becomes public property.
But his music has protection only for his lifetime (as it was his livelihood) and the lifetime of his children (the 70 year rule).
After that, the law thinks that music (and literature etc.) is so important to the public well-being that it should belong to everyone.

And it does . . . despite interested companies trying to erode that right . . .

PS
Neil clarinet, that's not right - the fair use code only applies to music where there is a copyright protection. Photocopying is not always illegal.
Photocopying is only illegal if you infringe someone's rights - of course you can photocpopy music if the rights to it have expired.
Which is the case, for instance, with all the works from composers who've been dead for over 70 years and the edition was published over 25 years ago (or a new edition has been entered using a music software program and the programmer is happy for that to be public).
That's why IMSLP and the Petrucci library and the big US libraries are all perfectly legal.

.

.

[Seer_Green]

So what's the position regarding candidates taking an ABRSM piano exam and going into the actual exam with handwritten copies of their exam pieces? Surely that can't be legal?

Why not ?
If the piece is by a composer who has been dead over 70 years, you should be able to go in with any copy you like.

My understanding is that you could go in with a handwritten or photocopy assuming that the piece/edition from which you made the copy is either covered through the fair use guidelines, or is out of copyright. A blanket assertion that it's OK because the composer's been dead 70 years is not strictly always the case.

[Lemontree]

I think, I will add a little more to all the confuzzlement with a question of my own.

Those copies, that are still protected under the copyright act, are there any differences between a copy bought for practice at home and copies bought for performance in a concert hall?

[Seer_Green]

Those copies, that are still protected under the copyright act, are there any differences between a copy bought for practice at home and copies bought for performance in a concert hall?

No so far as I know.

[dolce@piano]

So what's the position regarding candidates taking an ABRSM piano exam and going into the actual exam with handwritten copies of their exam pieces? Surely that can't be legal?

Why not ?
If the piece is by a composer who has been dead over 70 years, you should be able to go in with any copy you like.

My understanding is that you could go in with a handwritten or photocopy assuming that the piece/edition from which you made the copy is either covered through the fair use guidelines, or is out of copyright. A blanket assertion that it's OK because the composer's been dead 70 years is not strictly always the case.

Yes, sorry if I wasn't clear, I completely agree Seer Green.
Which is what I meant later when I said 'as long as you haven't slavishly copied out their version'. The piece must be out of copyright BOTH in relation to the composer (the 70 years) and the publishers' specific edition, which a hand-written or music software copy almost certainly will be unless you;ve put in every tiny editorial mark from a specific publishers' edition AND those marks were all original.

[dotted quaver]

So what's the position regarding candidates taking an ABRSM piano exam and going into the actual exam with handwritten copies of their exam pieces? Surely that can't be legal?

Why not ?
If the piece is by a composer who has been dead over 70 years, you should be able to go in with any copy you like.

My understanding is that you could go in with a handwritten or photocopy assuming that the piece/edition from which you made the copy is either covered through the fair use guidelines, or is out of copyright. A blanket assertion that it's OK because the composer's been dead 70 years is not strictly always the case.

I don't know which pieces these candidates played, but surely they couldn't have chosen 3 not covered by copyright? I'm thinking the list C piece here at least. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/unsure.gif)

[Seer_Green]

So what's the position regarding candidates taking an ABRSM piano exam and going into the actual exam with handwritten copies of their exam pieces? Surely that can't be legal?

Why not ?
If the piece is by a composer who has been dead over 70 years, you should be able to go in with any copy you like.

My understanding is that you could go in with a handwritten or photocopy assuming that the piece/edition from which you made the copy is either covered through the fair use guidelines, or is out of copyright. A blanket assertion that it's OK because the composer's been dead 70 years is not strictly always the case.

I don't know which pieces these candidates played, but surely they couldn't have chosen 3 not covered by copyright? I'm thinking the list C piece here at least. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/unsure.gif)

I wouldn't have thought it possible for List C.

[owainsutton]

I wouldn't have thought it possible for List C.

The 2012 Grade 8 violin syllabus has the Debussy sonata and a Kreutzer study in list C, both of which are available on IMSLP...

[barry-clari]

I wouldn't have thought it possible for List C.

The 2012 Grade 8 violin syllabus has the Debussy sonata and a Kreutzer study in list C, both of which are available on IMSLP...

I think many of the previous posters were talking piano, where list C is a different beast to string list Cs...