On 4 Sep 2005 at 16:35, John Howell wrote: > At 2:37 PM -0400 9/4/05, David W. Fenton wrote: > > > >I don't see the other reprint houses as being at all on the same > >level -- they add nothing, and reprint without permission, as long as > >it's not copyrighted in the US. > > You may be quite right about Dover. I included them because they are, > in fact, a reprint house, and not all their publications claim new > copyrights. But I don't quite understand your last comment. Anything > not covered by copyright in the U.S. is, by definition, in the public > domain IN THE U.S. No permission is required and no financial > arrangements are required to reprint it IN THE U.S. It cannot be sold > in countries in which it is still under copyright, of course, but > publishers do that all the time.
Well, I know for a fact that Dover reprints certain European editions with permission of the European copyright holders (some of the Mozart operas are in this class). And I also know that Dover has withdrawn certain editions after changes in copyright law. I don't know the exact timeframe, nor can I recall the exact repertory involved, but I distinctly remember finding that Dover had once published an edition of Mendelssohn's complete piano chamber music, but that the edition was withdrawn. I was told it was because of copyright changes, which would suggest that the original Dover reprint predated 1978. I don't have any facts on that one, just vague memories and suppositions. But I definitely know that some of Dover's reprints are with permission of copyright holders (I believe the Dpver Debussy reprints are, too, but I don't own any of those, because I have the original Durands). -- David W. Fenton http://www.bway.net/~dfenton David Fenton Associates http://www.bway.net/~dfassoc _______________________________________________ Finale mailing list [email protected] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
