This is a really good point, and one that I'm starting to agree with the more I dig into this mess. I can't see how anyone publishing lute books can be making a profit and paying the full license fees to the owner -- unless they are doing it under the guise of an academic publication. I've heard that libraries and museums charge less (or free) if they think the intent of your quest is academic. Poulton's Dowland book, for example, has all of Dowland's solo lute music from many different sources in one large volume -- did she pay rights to sell this music as a for-profit, music publisher or an academic? Many players use her editions for performance (O'Dette, Consort of Early Musike ...). Interesting loophole, and I wonder how many other publishers are getting around the heavy license fees by citing academic, not profit-based, motives? In the lute world, this wouldn't be totally untrue since there are so few players that actually purchase these books -- mostly libraries I guess. For example, I have been quoted a price of 500 hundred pounds (GBP) for unlimited distribution rights to Dowland's First Book of Songs in facsimile by the owning library. I was just using this is an example since it's pretty common -- I'm not going to publish this book! Anyway, how many copies at say $20 USD each do you have to sell to make a profit in the clear? I can't see how anyone can be profitable doing this based on market demand? Seems crazy really.
So, does anyone else think it might be a good idea to have a lawyer (and publishers?) give a workshop at the next LSA meeting? In an effort to help folks understand what's involved in producing editions of early music. Just a thought. It might help promote more folks getting involved in producing editions. I should mention that my initial intent for all of these questions was trying to see if there was a way to better facilitate access to primary lute materials and derived, readable player's editions. Sort of like a project Gutenberg for all lute and related music -- the repertoire isn't growing terribly fast and it seemed like a workable long-term effort. The archived music and editions could be mirrored in USA, Europe and Asia to provide fast, redundant access. Maybe a joint effort of all known lute societies? I know there are many great efforts to provide free lute music on the net, I was just exploring a larger idea that enforced some standards and allowed for collaboration and review. I've just about given up on ever aquiring facsimiles due to cost, but I'm still interested in the legalities of producing nice player's editions. A larger idea that might end up as a proposal to the LSA and others if I can get a sufficient handle on the legal issues. Thanks for all who have replied. Chris --- Denys Stephens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Dear Michael, > I don't think there is any kind of conspiracy to prevent those of us with > an interest in original sources of music to obtain copies. I don't have a > vast experience of this, but I have not failed so far to obtain either a > microfilm or print of unpublished sources that I have been interested in. > You need to find the right person at the museum or library that holds > the original, you need to find out (and follow!) how their rules work and > you need > to be very patient and courteous in communicating with them. As custodians > of much of the world's musical heritage, not just for us but for the future, > they have a duty to look after the material in their charge. But on the > whole, I have > found they are very responsive to those of us that have a genuine > interest in it. As far as I am aware, those who publish facsimiles of early > music sources are at least partly motivated by altruistic concerns for > promoting or preserving the music. There can hardly be any kind of > profit in it. Lets face it - if you want to make money in publishing you > go for books about movie stars, football or gardening. Ever met the > self made millionaire who made his fortune in lute books? > > Best wishes, > Denys > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Michael Thames" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Howard Posner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Euge" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Sunday, November 30, 2003 4:58 AM > Subject: Re: usage rights, facsimiles etc... > > > > Euge, > > This leads me to the question of who has access to facsimiles. > Certainly, > > If I walk in to a museum and ask to see Bach's original works I will most > > likley be turned away. But if someone else is in the bussiness of > > publishing music has access, with the intention of making a profit, and > > being the only ones who have gained access, this seems unethical as well. > > Because by them having access alone, it denies others access to what is > > public domain. > > Museums don't like allot of people handling there manuscripts, and I > > think mostly likely would be happy to see someone who publishes music > handle > > this for them, and then limit access to you and me, once the facsimiles > > where made. So, I do look at it as a bit unethical on the publishers side > as > > well, especially for just photos with no editing or commentary at all. > > > > Michael Thames > > Luthier > > www.ThamesClassicalGuitars.com > > Site design by Natalina Calia-Thames > > > > > ===== web: http://www.christopherschaub.com email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
