My first and last post here

• Aug 10, 2020 - 11:18

So, I realized that in order for me to download for example "Arrival of the birds" arrangement for piano of Emily Flood I need to became pro member as trial, giving my credit card during the trial period. No price of the trial, no any information will it cost me anything if I signed up with it.
This is making me really bad feeling. So I decided to pull off my works here at musescore website and leave.
Since when I need to pay for an amateur job of an copyrighted irl work to change it and play it on the piano in home? That's what I was going to do with the arrangement I decided to take.
Since I can not longer download for free a music, that should not be copyrighted [ it's an arrangement for piano, which is far away from the cinematic orchestra as way of handling!] I decide with this post to leave this website permanently. It is not just that. For example I have the abbility to have only 5 scores public in this website for free. Since when I should pay to publish my own composing work???? This is insane! No a person in his right mind would pay to publish his own compositions! For what? Does I get any plus from that?
Thank you very much for past years, but my supprt to your app and website is officially over. Good bye.


'' Since when I need to pay for an amateur job of an copyrighted irl work ''

Well... since copyright royalties exist actually.

Common agreement is to use 1710 as first year (Copyright Act de 1710)

Also, for the record, the reason you need to pay to download copyrighted music is to pay the copyright owner. Otherwise, the copyirght owners can and do sue MuseScore. That's true whether the arrangement you want to download is significantly different from the original or not - the original composition remains protected by copyright law. MuseScore doesn't make the copyright laws, they simply need to follow them like everyone else.

But as mentioned, the flip side is, you no longer need a Pro account to upload unlimited scores. Not that this was insane before - did you think the service costs nothing to provide? So yes, people in their right mind pay for online storage space and web services all the time.

In reply to by Marc Sabatella

It should not be copyrighted since it is an piano transcription of the original work from person that did not wrote the original work. As far as the fact that this "service"cost money - why should I care for that? YouTube costs money, but do I need to pay for a single upload? No. Then why should I pay for this service? It's lot more down then Avid Sibelius software and it provides only one thing - notation app. That's it.

In reply to by mike320

Also, YouTube offers no possibilty to download the sheet music. The laws regarding recordings of copyrighted music are different than the laws regarding sheet music arrangements. If YouTube wished to offer a sheet music download service, they would quickly realize, as MuseScore has, that the copyright owners are far more particular about how their sheet music licensing is structured.

In reply to by Marc Sabatella

Obviously both of you does not know anything about the YT copyrighted system.
I used to have piano performance of the Moonlight Sonata in YT. It was a my interpretation, so YT asked me is this my interpretation of the piece or it is the original. Of course it was not copyrighted original.
As far for ads I am using Tampermonkey and nano adblocker. If a person does not want to see the ads there- there is a ways to get rid of them.
And also YT is a company that makes money from those ads. But they are very big name and brand, while Musescore can only dream of such development. Because obviously no one would like tyo invest to the challenge in here.
Also FYI an arrangement, nm how close is to the orignal is still interpretation. Because it can't be the same. Cinematic orchestra never published piano transcription of the "arrival birds" music. So it is copyrighted only for the original performance and not for anything else. An transcription of an piece, created from another creator should not be a subject of an copyright. This is not a valid reason for require from me to download this arrangement to pay for it, adding pro account. How should I trust you that you wont charge me for downloading it? What about if I don't have the funds?
You really think that someone would believe your irrelevant logic that because the original piece is copyrighted all of it's reproducing, nm how inaccurate they are should be subject of an copyright? If you are so concenred with a copyright issue why nobody pays to me copyright for the two own compositions I uploaded here? I had two piece for piano uploaded here, nobody paid me for every single download of those which arew creative common attribution licence, which were original works!
I found that you all here are hypocritical. I had readed some topics about that issue here and I think you all are very toxic people. This was my last. Obviously even with extended explanation I am pretty sure you wont uinderstand half of the things I said correctly. Which is sad, because this means you all need to change your judgement. And I can't do it.

In reply to by [DELETED] 35839956

Any transcription or arrangement of a copyrighted work published without the original copyright holder's explicit agreement (and outside some scientific work) is a copyright violation.

An transcription of an piece, created from another creator should not be a subject of an copyright'
Why should it not? What ever, it is!

why nobody pays to me copyright for the two own compositions I uploaded here
Because you, and voluntary, uploaded them. There's no copyright violation there, so no compensation for any.
You can disable download and negotiate a price with users that want to

In reply to by [DELETED] 35839956

Lot of incorrect things in there...
But you mentionned one real problem of the music industry though...
That is when you said: why don't I get royalties for my 2 scores...
It is the current situation that the royalties are only more or less fairly collected if you have a contract with a major company.
But then of course they take a big percentage of it and your music doesn't belong to you anymore... See the problem of Stephan Eicher...

In reply to by [DELETED] 35835163

As already explained, that's just not how copyright law works. You can look it up for yourself if you like, keeping in mind the specifics are different for every country and I don't know where you live. But there is no country on earth where you can legally publish your own piano arrangement of a copyrighted composition without permission. That's just how it is, and neither MuseScore nor any other company can legally get around this. For years they tried, but eventually the copyright owners and their lawyers caught up. The choice was, find a way to pay the copyright owners per download, or have the site shut down.

And again, as mentioned, you absolutely do not need to pay to upload music. This was the case years ago but hasn't been true for some time.

In reply to by Jojo-Schmitz

'' And isn't either ''

Well ok... But then it is quite a contradiction with what you always answer to people complaining that they have to pay:

They are the good guys, they would do otherwise if they can,it is because they must pay the royalties, they have saved the site,...

Now if you say their goal is to win as much money as they can, you could as well answer that immediately, couldn't you ?

Just trying to find the correct balance between these two...

In reply to by frfancha

[["which is why youtube has so many ads"
Copyright is one reason, but is far from being "the" reason.
"The" reason is that Google is not a non-profit association (it isn't a reproach, just a fact)]]

My response was to this:
"YouTube costs money, but do I need to pay for a single upload? No. Then why should I pay for this service?"
You don't pay to upload because, in part, the ads do. I have no problem with copyright.

In reply to by [DELETED] 35835163

If the melody of a work is similar enough to be recognizable as "yes this work is this", that work - whatever its genre: orchestral or guitar transcription, or simply its melody or leadsheet - is considered to originate from the work of the original work owner.

For this reason, if a share has to be paid even for a simple melody, this share is paid to the copyright holder by "". And you probably pay a subscription fee to download music for that reason.

But this site is "", not "". Therefore, it may be better to explain your problem there.

Do you still have an unanswered question? Please log in first to post your question.