Wow ... it just gets curiouser and curiouser. Your points are well
taken. Actually, the arrangement is for Band. and I'm basically done
with it. It will receive some public performances, but I don't, at
present, have plans to publish unless it's wildly successful, of
course. The thought crossed my mind, what about a tune like, say,
"Silent Night," which, I'm sure, is arranged a hundred times a
year. I assume it's in PD, but is it possible that the estate of
Franz Gruber or some other entity has the basic copyright on it and
the law just keeps getting broken? I mean, if I were to arrange it, I
wouldn't consult any written version, I'd just take it out of my
brain and do it ... I don't know, it is confusing.
Dean
On Nov 15, 2006, at 3:17 AM, dhbailey wrote:
Your statement about such songs having "been transcribed hundreds
of times" may not quite be accurate the way you wish it to be --
those works may have only been transcribed hundreds of times AFTER
the publication of HAM. And they may have been done with written
permission from the copyright owners or they may have not been done
with such permission, neither of which conditions helps you.
If those works really have been transcribed hundreds of times,
before and after the publication of HAM, then you can most likely
go ahead with your arrangement.
Now if you can find an edition which predates the HAM edition, or
if you can find cite editions which cite different original
sources, you can come to an understanding of just what is
copyrighted in each edition and then filter that stuff out and
create your own edition.
And the final thing to consider is the scope of the arrangement you
wish to do -- are you planning on having it published? If not,
then creating your arrangement may well stay completely off the
copyright radar and never be an issue. If you are planning on
having it published, the publisher you submit it to may have better
knowledge of the legality of the arrangement.
I don't know about your comment about the compilers of HAM having
"found a raft of literature in some previously printed format" --
if they found the music in manuscripts in a library, Davison and
Appel may well be looked on under the copyright law as being the
first to publish the music and thus be entitled to full copyright
as if they had composed the music themselves.
And finally, the copyright law as it was in effect in 1946 when the
book was originally published was quite different from the law as
it stands today, and these issues may not be valid concerns at
all. I am intrigued by the fact that the book carries a copyright
notice which says it was copyright 1946 and copyright 1949 by the
fellows of Harvard University. I wonder what the two copyrights
cover.
David H. Bailey
Dean M. Estabrook wrote:
Hmmmm ... very interesting. Somehow, I knew it would be more
complex than I thought. Realistically (which, I realize, has
nothing to do with legal workings), just because they found a raft
of literature in some previously printed format, obviously, and
compiled it in their volume, shouldn't give them ownership over
said literature for ever and ever amen, it seems to me. I can
certainly see their right to claim copyright on the volume itself,
but on a song that's been around for 4 centuries, and has been
transcribed hundreds of times ... seems strange to me. Anyway,
thanks for the response.
Dean
On Nov 14, 2006, at 3:21 PM, dhbailey wrote:
Dean M. Estabrook wrote:
If I choose to arrange a Renaissance piece that I dig out of the
HAM (Harvard Anthology of Music), Can I be fairly certain that
it is in public domain? If not, how does one find out that status?
The HAM is copyrighted, renewed in 1974 by Alice Humez and Willi
Apel. What they're claiming copyright on however is open to
debate since the works in the book were written long enough ago
to be in the public domain. Is their copyright in the collection
itself? Is it in the editions/modernizations of the different
works in the collection?
You could always write and ask for permission. Or you could go
ahead and arrange it, figuring that it won't raise enough ripples
to be noticed by Humez and Apel. Or figuring that their
copyright is in the collection as a whole (and the explanatory
notes) and not in the individual works themselves, you can go
ahead with your plan.
The only real way to find out the status of one of the works in
such a collection is to consult a copyright attorney. Copyright
holders often claim copyright in things they don't actually have
copyright in. Only the legal system can give the correct answer,
and often that's wrong, too. That's what appeals courts are
for. ;-)
--David H. Bailey
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
_______________________________________________
Finale mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Dean M. Estabrook
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Have you ever heard of an eleven or thirteen step program?
_______________________________________________
Finale mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
--
David H. Bailey
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
_______________________________________________
Finale mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Dean M. Estabrook
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Have you ever heard of an eleven or thirteen step program?
_______________________________________________
Finale mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
