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

Reply via email to