A bit more comprehensive answer to what Johannes Gebauer wrote, than
what I've seen thus far:
Just out of curiosity, I am currently wondering whether a printed
edition from 1978 in the US is still under copyright (for the printed
edtion, not for the piece itself, which is from the 19th century)?
While there is, in Europe, the concept of a "typgraphical" copyright,
wherein the layout of a work on the page is eligible for a separate, and
generally shorter copyright, than the composer's right, there is no such
concept in the U.S. Only content is eligible for copyright protection.
A piece published in the 19th century is in the public domain. If,
however, an editor in 1978 added new content to the work, correcting
printer's errors, or other obvious errors in the original, or by adding
performance indications, for example, adding the indications needed to
adapt a work originally conceived for a three manual organ, to a two
manual one, of by arranging it for a novel combination of instruments,
as for example, by adapting the a Bach Prelude and Fugue for organ for
brass quartet.
So, if you have access to an original of the edition, and can determine
what editorial content may have been added and restore the original,
there is no copyright, and in the U.S., if you make a different
arrangement, (taking the same Bach P&F and arranging it for woodwind
quartet, instead of Brass quartet), you can claim a copyright on that
for yourself.
There is little case or statutory law to define how much editorial
content justifies a new copyright; I've seen copyright claimed for
eliminating one stanza of a hymn text, I've seen it claimed for
re-voicing a single chord, as for example, in a C major chord, where the
tenors sang middle c, and the altos, the e third above, exchanging the
notes. I am inclined to think that neither of these claims to copyright
would withstand a legal challenge.
ns
_______________________________________________
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
