Dear Stefan,

I was glad to read your mail, as it reverberated many of my own thoughts on
this issue. If what you say is right, then, I suppose we have no issue at
all. So, those flame-wars were actually only in vain. :) Happy if they were!

Best Regards

G�ran

----- Original Message -----
From: "Stefan Ecke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: 17. desember 2003 21:55
Subject: Copyright and library restrictions in Germany


| Dear lute list members,
|
| as some of the original source of lute music are in German
| libraries and part of the publishing is also done in Germany, I thought
| it might be useful to write what I have found out about the legal
| situation with respect to contractual restrictions imposed on persons
| obtaining microfilms from libraries and the German copyright.
| I think this is also relevant to the controversial views recently
expressed
| on the lute list.
|
| For those of you able and willing to read layers German
| I found three links specifically dealing
| with the usage of manuscripts in public libraries:
|
|
http://www.bibliotheksverband.de/dbi-berlib/dbi_pub/einzelth/rechtpub/handsc
h1.htm
|
http://deposit.ddb.de/ep/netpub/89/96/96/967969689/_data_stat/www.dbi-berlin
.de/dbi_pub/einzelth/rechtpub/handsch1.htm
|
http://deposit.ddb.de/ep/netpub/89/96/96/967969689/_data_stat/www.dbi-berlin
.de/dbi_pub/einzelth/rechtpub/handsch2.htm
|
| At least part of the authors of these links believe that public libraries
| can not
| deny you to publish a manuscript in their possession. In short, their
| argumentation
| is as follows:
| The library only owns the physical object not the content of the
manuscript.
| Publishing the music does therefore not affect their rights as owners
(they
| can however deny you the access to the original if they fear it might be
| damaged). Restriction in publishing the content affect for instance the
freedom
| of science, the right of free access to information and freedom of speech.
| While it is clear, that libraries in principle can restrict rights by
their
| "terms of business", experts do not agree wether this may go so far as to
| restrict such important laws as above.
|
| About copyright:
| German copyright on a piece of music expires 70 years after the death
| of its creator (composer, arranger). So, apart from modern
| compositions and intabulations or arrangements, all lute music is in
| the public domain. There are two situations where one can obtain
| a copyright on a specific _edition_ of public domain music.
|
| 1. The edition is a "scientific edition" ("wissenschaftliche Ausgabe")
| 2. It is the first edition of previously unpublished material ("Editio
| Princeps")
|
| A "scientific edition" must be the result of scientific work and
| it must be substantially different from all known previous editions
| of the work. I think D. Poulton's edition of Dowland's solo lute
| music is a good example for such an edition. The music had been
| collected from a lot of different sources. Errors have been corrected.
| A list of references has been added. Thus scientific work has been added.
| I don't know wether correcting a few misprints already makes an edition
| "scientific". It would perhaps not be substantially different from the
| original.
| I also don't know wether adding a scientific work to a facsimile edition
| would make the complete edition a "scientific edition" or wether this
would
| only apply to the added material (as in US law).
|
| Anyway, a pure facsimile edition is
| not a "scientific edition".
|
| You may not copy a "scientific edition". You may not typset it newly.
| If you perform or record the music _from this edition_ you might have
| to pay royalties.
| The Copyright on a "scientific edition" expires 25 years after it was
| first published.
|
| An "Editio Princeps" is the first edition of a piece of music that was
| never published before. Thus this part of the copyright law only
| applies to lute manuscripts and not to historical prints of lute music.
| The person who first publishes or performs (!!) a so far unpublished
| piece of music, owns the rights overs the music for the next 25 years!
| Thus the lutenist who is first to publish or perform in public a
previously
| unpublished piece of music, can ask for royalties form all other
| lutenists that play the piece.
| Personally, I think this regulation is unbelievable.
|
| However, a pure facsimile edition of a printed book of lute music is not
| protected by copyright, since neither of the above situations applies
| You may copy the music by hand, typeset it
| newly and spread your version for free (I had this confirmed by the
| VG-Musikediton, an organization collecting royalties for copyrighted
| printed music, www.vg-musikedition.de)
|
| You can probably also do
| so with a microfilm obtained from a library (if the considerations
| above about library restrictions being illegal are correct)
|
| You may however not photocopy the facsimile or microfilm, since then you
| would violate the copyright on the _photo_ the library or publisher has
| produced. Even that is questionable, however, since the copyright law
| requires a
| minimum of creativity involved in making a photograph. Some experts
believe
| this is not given for facsimiles.
|
| However, if you _sold_ your edition in Germany you would perhaps
| violate a German law against unfair business practices ("Gesetz
| gegen unlauteren Wettbewerb, UWG"), because you would
| use somebody else work for your own profit. In this case
| the publishers/libraries work to produce the facsimile/microfilm.
| Spreading the music for free is alright.
|
| For those who have read so far: I don't take responsibility
| for the correctness of what I have written. I am happy to hear about
| corrections or additions. All translations of German words
| are mine. I don't know wether they are correct and wether there is
| an "official" translation.
|
| Best wishes,
| Stefan Ecke
|
|
|


Reply via email to