John Howell wrote:
But you still wouldn't have, and couldn't have, without permission,
the text, so the logic of what your suggest escapes me. What would be
the point?
The point is to provide a mechanism by which one inspired to write music
in response for, or as a setting of, a text subject
John Howell wrote:
But you still wouldn't have, and couldn't have, without permission,
the text, so the logic of what your suggest escapes me. What would be
the point?
The point is to provide a mechanism by which one inspired to write music
in response for, or as a setting of, a text subject
At 03:09 PM 8/26/2007 -0600, you wrote:
Now, since copyright prevents is your making a copy of the covered
material without permission, don't include most of the words of the text
of the copyright material in your setting. Rather, you music everything
else that would be in the printed score:
On Aug 27, 2007, at 8:56 AM, Dennis Bathory-Kitsz wrote:
But wouldn't you know that the texts I picked are protected by the
most
aggressive estate in all of poetry: T. S. Eliot, who died in 1965. The
estate denies all requests not accompanied by an enormous purse.
I guess that's how the
At 03:09 PM 8/26/2007 -0600, you wrote:
Where the lyric would customarily be printed,
include only the punctuation, and perhaps the occasional word or short
phrase from the intended text, as these are explicitly not
copyrightable.
I realize I didn't address this directly. The aggressive Eliot
On Aug 27, 2007, at 8:56 AM, Dennis Bathory-Kitsz wrote:
Ash Wednesday was published in 1930. I composed the setting three
years
before the original copyright was set to expire, and didn't expect it
to be
published (though it was performed) until after the expiration in
1986. Now
it is
Was SG working in the Soviet Union when she composed this setting. Was UK
copyright binding there? IIRC Sibelius (the composer, not the program)
lost a fortune on Valse Triste since Finland wasn't in the copyright
union.
On Aug 27, 2007, at 8:56 AM, Dennis Bathory-Kitsz wrote:
Ash Wednesday
At 10:44 AM 8/27/2007 -0400, you wrote:
What then of Sofia Gubaidulina's setting of this text, wh. has been
not only performed but recorded?
More than the title of the flute concerto? I don't know this -- tell more.
Dennis
___
Finale mailing list
At 1:53 AM -0600 8/27/07, Noel Stoutenburg wrote:
John Howell wrote:
But you still wouldn't have, and couldn't have, without permission,
the text, so the logic of what your suggest escapes me. What would
be the point?
The point is to provide a mechanism by which one inspired to write
music
On Aug 27, 2007, at 11:13 AM, Dennis Bathory-Kitsz wrote:
At 10:44 AM 8/27/2007 -0400, you wrote:
What then of Sofia Gubaidulina's setting of this text, wh. has been
not only performed but recorded?
More than the title of the flute concerto? I don't know this -- tell
more.
Dennis
I'd
Noel Stoutenburg wrote:
dhbailey wrote:
MB wrote:
[snip] In 1992, Congress enacted a law that made renewal automatic
for works
published between 1964 and 1978. However, if a work was published
[snip]
This baffles me, since the 1978 rewrite of the U.S. Copyright law
automatically extended
At 11:06 PM 8/23/2007 -0600, Noel Stoutenburg wrote:
Section (h) (8) (A) explicitly defines source country for the purposes
of of Title 17 Section 104, as A nation other than the United States.
Accordingly, (h) (6) (B) specifically applies to items in the public
domain in the United States, but
Dennis Bathory-Kitsz wrote:
Back in my cute-but-dumb days, I set several forbidden texts, and the
compositions are now not publishable or even performable (technically,
anyway). Good pieces, too.
It seems to me that there is a creative way around this, though finding
a publisher might be a
At 3:09 PM -0600 8/26/07, Noel Stoutenburg wrote:
Dennis Bathory-Kitsz wrote:
Back in my cute-but-dumb days, I set several forbidden texts, and the
compositions are now not publishable or even performable (technically,
anyway). Good pieces, too.
It seems to me that there is a creative way
John Howell wrote:
At 3:09 PM -0600 8/26/07, Noel Stoutenburg wrote:
Dennis Bathory-Kitsz wrote:
Back in my cute-but-dumb days, I set several forbidden texts, and the
compositions are now not publishable or even performable (technically,
anyway). Good pieces, too.
It seems to me that there is
On Aug 26, 2007, at 8:07 PM, John Howell wrote:
But you still wouldn't have, and couldn't have, without permission,
the text, so the logic of what your suggest escapes me. What would be
the point?
If I write a purely musical piece, with the instruction to be sung to
the words of [poem]
MB wrote:
[snip] In 1992, Congress enacted a law that made renewal automatic for
works
published between 1964 and 1978. However, if a work was published
[snip]
This baffles me, since the 1978 rewrite of the U.S. Copyright law
automatically extended the term for works which were then in their
dhbailey wrote:
MB wrote:
[snip] In 1992, Congress enacted a law that made renewal automatic
for works
published between 1964 and 1978. However, if a work was published
[snip]
This baffles me, since the 1978 rewrite of the U.S. Copyright law
automatically extended the term for works which
:Re: [Finale] OT permission to set poems
Plain Text Attachment [ Scan and Save to Computer ]
MB wrote:
[snip] In 1992, Congress enacted a law that made renewal automatic for
works
published between 1964 and 1978. However, if a work was published
[snip]
This baffles me, since the 1978
this issue to our attention.
Marilyn
-
Forwarded Message
From: David W. Fenton [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: finale@shsu.edu
Date: Thu, 23 Aug 2007 08:08:41 -0400
Subject:Re: [Finale] OT permission to set poems
On 22 Aug 2007 at 11:58, John Howell wrote:
Anything
At 10:44 AM -0400 8/22/07, Stu McIntire wrote:
I would appreciate someone pointing me to a resource that tells how best to
go about getting permission to set a published poem to music, with the
expectation that the resulting piece will be performed and published
eventually, even if just by me.
Friends,
I would note that in response to part of what John Howell wrote:
...Anything published after that is probably still under copyright,
meaning that it belongs to the copyright owner, and you must ask
permission to use it, and pay whatever fee or royalty the copyright
owner asks or not
At 06:43 AM 8/23/2007 -0600, Noel Stoutenburg wrote:
that the word probably may be overstating the case. Items copyrighted
in the U.S. after 1923, and before a date in the mid 1960's (If I
remember correctly, and I don't have time at the moment to be sure that
I do) were copyrighted for a term
On 22 Aug 2007 at 11:58, John Howell wrote:
Anything published before 1923 is in the public
domain (in the U.S.), and may be used freely by anyone. It belongs to
all of us.
What about a public-domain poem published in a critical edition that
is itself under copyright, such as a Norton
Dennis Bathory-Kitsz wrote:
The 1994 law included restored copyright for many works
in the public domain. It's a minefield for composers.
I concede that the issue of restored copyright has caused problems for
composers, but for the most part, unless one is dealing with material
from the former
At 8:08 AM -0400 8/23/07, David W. Fenton wrote:
On 22 Aug 2007 at 11:58, John Howell wrote:
Anything published before 1923 is in the public
domain (in the U.S.), and may be used freely by anyone. It belongs to
all of us.
What about a public-domain poem published in a critical edition
On Aug 23, 2007, at 10:11 AM, Noel Stoutenburg wrote:
Dennis Bathory-Kitsz wrote:
The 1994 law included restored copyright for many works in the
public domain. It's a minefield for composers.
I concede that the issue of restored copyright has caused problems
for composers, but for the most
On Aug 23, 2007, at 8:08 AM, David W. Fenton wrote:
What about a public-domain poem published in a critical edition that
is itself under copyright, such as a Norton anthology? Is it not the
case that the particular variant spellings and line breaks and so
forth might make it prudent (if not
At 05:11 PM 8/23/2007 -0400, Andrew Stiller wrote:
The one exception would be if
the creator deliberately placed the work in the public domain. That is,
when pigs fly.
Some pigs do fly.
I just saw some of the scores by John Greschak (whose IWBNI site is now
indexed again, by the way, at
On Aug 22, 2007, at 11:58 AM, John Howell wrote:
Anything published after[1923] is probably still under copyright,
meaning that it belongs to the copyright owner, and you must ask
permission to use it, and pay whatever fee or royalty the copyright
owner asks or not use it. You need a
In response to part of what Dennis Bathory-Kitsz wrote,
The 1994 law included restored copyright for many works in the
public domain. It's a minefield for composers.
I wrote, asserting
I concede that the issue of restored copyright has caused problems
for composers, but for the most part,
I meant, in my post, in reference to the item on the Cornell University
website (cf.
http://www.copyright.cornell.edu/training/copyrightterm.pdf) to
particularly call attention to the fourth line from the bottom of page
1, and to footnote 7 on page 3.
ns
A total of *150* years, no? (80 +70 = 150). And this is provided the
copyright terms are not further extended during the composer's lifetime.
Cheers,
- Darcy
-
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Brooklyn, NY
On 23 Aug 2007, at 5:11 PM, Andrew Stiller wrote:
If I had the opportunity to ask one question
Never mind -- I'm an idiot. The song was written when the composer
was *20*, so *60*+70, not 80+70. Writing a hit song before your first
birthday might be a little much for even the most talented of prodigies.
Cheers,
- Darcy
-
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Brooklyn, NY
On 23 Aug 2007, at 7:07
At 05:23 PM 8/23/2007 -0600, Noel Stoutenburg wrote:
However, this does not appear to be consistent with the infomation
contained on the Cornell University website
Read the actual law, particularly the section that I referenced. That
should make it clear.
The reference to certain foreign works
Dennis Bathory-Kitsz wrote:
Read the actual law, particularly the section that I referenced. That
should make it clear.
The reference to certain foreign works is in another section. You want
(a)(1)(A) and (B) and (h)(6)(C)(i).
Section (h) (8) (A) explicitly defines source country for the
I would appreciate someone pointing me to a resource that tells how best to
go about getting permission to set a published poem to music, with the
expectation that the resulting piece will be performed and published
eventually, even if just by me.
Thanks, all -
Stu
Stu:
You need to contact the copyright holder of the poem.
Send a letter stating your request and intended outcome. It can help
to send a short resume so they know better who you are.
I've had no difficulty in securing permission, particularly from
living poets, when I tell them just how much
At 10:44 AM 8/22/2007 -0400, Stu McIntire wrote:
I would appreciate someone pointing me to a resource that tells how best to
go about getting permission to set a published poem to music
Best starter article:
http://www.newmusicbox.org/article.nmbx?id=4576
Dennis
Stu McIntire wrote:
I would appreciate someone pointing me to a resource that tells how best to
go about getting permission to set a published poem to music, with the
expectation that the resulting piece will be performed and published
eventually, even if just by me.
Thanks, all -
Stu
Stu McIntire wrote:
I would appreciate someone pointing me to a resource that tells how best to
go about getting permission to set a published poem to music, with the
expectation that the resulting piece will be performed and published
eventually, even if just by me.
I'm not sure quite what you
Thanks much, Dennis and Carolyn -
Stu
___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
42 matches
Mail list logo
