[Foundation-l] Implications of IMSLP case

Mon Oct 22 16:05:37 UTC 2007

Andrew Gray wrote:
> On 22/10/2007, Ray Saintonge <saintonge at telus.net> wrote:
>   
>>> Further protected, what are they talking about? Any ideas?
>>>       
>> No.  If they are making such a claim it's up to them to provide a basis
>> for it - perhaps a section of the Copyright Act.
>>     
> The obvious exception that springs to mind is unpublished material -
> this varies, but generally material which is posthumously published
> for the first time gets a fixed copyright term (held by the
> 'discoverer') even if it would have been out of copyright through
> being old. The exact form of protection, and how long it's protected
> for, varies both on the specific material and on the local
> legislation.
>
> For example, you can say "all of Wilde's plays are out of copyright",
> and be generally correct - he died 1900 - but the four-act edition of
> "The Importance of Being Earnest" is still in copyright, because this
> was only rediscovered and republished recently.
>
> Determining which version of a musical work is the actually-published
> old one, and which is the amended (altered, edited?) new one, can be
> rather tricky for a nonspecialist.
These exceptions are always there, but they do not justify a blanket 
statement covering all of a person's works.  Much also depends on the 
country involved.  In the absence of specific facts I can't comment on 
the Wilde material.  Canadian law is in transition since the end of 1998 
to a strict life + 50 rule, with no additional protection for posthumous 
works.  Material discovered today written by a person who died before 
1949 is not protected.  The editor's additions would still receive 
protection, but not the original material.  No copyrights are attached 
to discovery.

The question of musical works does have a few wrinkles that would be 
difficult for a non-specialist.  Musical typography may be the most 
important one, but if we have adequate musical software in place we 
don't need their typography.  Minor changes and correction would lack 
the originality required for a new copyright.  This sort of question 
suggests that a case by case review is needed for musical scores, and 
that we should shy away from generalisations. 

Ec