Paul Morris <paulmorrisco...@gmail.com> writes: > After looking into it some more I think it's unlikely that an exact > translation into a different notation system qualifies as a derivative > work. "The transformation, modification or adaption of the work must > be substantial and bear its author's personality to be original and > thus protected by copyright."[1] > > If that's right, then I think something like the following should work > for attribution statements: > > Translated into Clairnote music notation using LilyPond by Paul > Morris. Original LilyPond file from the Mutopia Project, typeset in > standard music notation by Nikos Kouremenos (© 2014, > Mutopia-2014/03/24-519), used under a Creative Commons > Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International license — > http://creativecommons.org/licenses/ — free to distribute, modify, and > perform. > > Translated into Clairnote music notation using LilyPond by Paul > Morris. Original LilyPond file from the Mutopia Project, typeset in > standard music notation and placed in the public domain by Stelios > Samelis (Mutopia-2012/12/23-931) — free to distribute, modify, and > perform.
That does not make sense. You make different statements about the date and source _and_ the licensing of the "Original LilyPond file from the Mutopia project". -- David Kastrup _______________________________________________ Mutopia-discuss mailing list Mutopia-discuss@mutopiaproject.org http://lists.bcn.mythic-beasts.com/mailman/listinfo/mutopia-discuss