Copyrights and MuseScore, MIDI, XML files on Internet
Hi, Gang!!!
I wonder if someone can publish, in this forum, the rules about the music copyrights, because I have some doubts about it.
For example: If I transcript some music work, which I'm not the composer, and I write it with MuseScore and I upload it to the Internet MuseScore community, for full free sharing, Am I a law-breaker? ???
Thanks a lot for your help!!!
Greetings!!!
Juan
Comments
If you have the copyright owner's agreement you're in the clear, if not it depends on country and local law. In general, I think, you'd be breaking law.
In reply to If you have the copyright by Jojo-Schmitz
Even I'm not earning any money? ???
In reply to Even I'm not earning any by jotape1960
Whether or not you earn money is completely irrelevant here, theft is theft, whether you just store and display the stolen items or whether you sell them
In reply to Whether or not you earn money by Jojo-Schmitz
So, if I want to share some piece (for example, Für Elissa), I could be breaking the law and I would be a transgressor. That is? ???
In reply to So, if I want to share some by jotape1960
"Für Elise" is free of copyrights as far as I know, the author is dead since very long (and how long they have to be dead is one aspect of local legislation). Bach, Mozart Beethoven, all copyright free. But e.g. pieces of the Beatles are not.
In reply to "Für Elise" is free of by Jojo-Schmitz
OK, I think I "catch" the idea: We can write the music from long time death composers because it's free. But we can not to write the music from live composers because it has copyrights. Is it? ???
In reply to OK, I think I "catch" the by jotape1960
You can, but need the authors' agreement. Or the author's heir's agreement. Actually the copyright holder's agreement, whoever that may be (e.g. the author may have sold his/her copyright to someone else).
They would usually grant this, given enough money is involved ;-)
Any you don't need anything, as long as you don't publish it.
In reply to You can, but need the by Jojo-Schmitz
I see.
The original question/issue was because I understand that the MuseScore music space is to share music. And I think there should be a lot of people that just want to share music, so...
Anyway, now I know the rules, which were made to be transgressed, if not... Tell it to the politicians, Hahahahahaha!!!!!!!
Greetings!!!
Juan
In reply to I see. The original by jotape1960
Well, these rules and laws were made to protect the copyright owners, who may need to make their living out if their intellectual property...
In reply to Well, these rules and laws by Jojo-Schmitz
I have followed this thread with interest since I make arrangements of various pieces. I always try to check that the composer is long dead, over the 70 years that is the rule in the UK where I live.
However, I am interested to know where things stand generally. For example, I have just checked and there are well over 100 arrangements of assorted Beatles numbers in the MuseScore sheet music uploads. I am sure that all of these infringe copyright. I believe copyright for Beatles tunes rests with a number of different organisations (probably Paul McCartney and Northern Songs in the main, but there are possibly others - weren't the rights at one point sold to Michael Jackson??)
Now I know most people who do these arrangements do so for their own fun and entertainment, but this does not make any difference to copyright ownership. What is the position of the MuseScore organisation? Are they considered to be the publisher since the uploaded music appears on the MuseScore website?
I suspect that if no attempt is made to profit financially then it is unlikely that the copyright holder will pursue claims, but if they did who would be liable in the case of MuseScore, the arranger or those who "own" "MuseScore"?
Thorny ground I feel.
In reply to I have followed this thread by ahiw
The issue of whether someone profits financially is, as has been mentioned, mostly immaterial to the question of whether something is in violation. And in fact, to the extent it matters, it may be the opposite of what one might assume: distributing someone else's work without permission for free is in some ways *worse* than selling it. That's because one of the determining factors legally (in the US at least) is the effect the violation has on the market for the work. If you sell your version, people are going to have to pay for it, and they would then be just as likely to buy a legal version. Whereas if you give yours away for free, then many people who might otherwise have bought the legal version now will not, because they have a free alternative.
Of course, that's not the only consideration, and it is absolutely true that the question of whether someone finds it in their interests to actually sue someone for posting an arrangement of their music is another matter entirely. Very likely, many artists are happy to have their music shared in this particular way, since they weren't likely to be producing these types of arrangements anyhow and they recognize that having their music distributed in this form might actually *increase* the market for their own versions. But the law (in most countries anyhow) generally doesn't allow you to just assume that.
In reply to "Für Elise" is free of by Jojo-Schmitz
There is no thorny ground. If the owners of the copyrights request removal under the Digital Millenium Copyright Act and the offending materials are not taken down, the owners of the web site are liable. It's the same rules that apply to YouTube.
As has been pointed out, it copyright depends on the country. There is no Public Domain for German born composers in Germany. Beethoven and Bach are still under copyright in the land of their birth. Mozart, being born in Austria, is not.
In reply to There is no thorny ground. If by MikeHalloran
Do you have any proof for this?
In reply to "Für Elise" is free of by Jojo-Schmitz
In the United States, all music created or published before January 1, 1923 is under copyright. Works published before Jan 1, 1978 are protected for 95 years; works published after are protected for the life of the last surviving composer or author plus 70 years. There are different rules governing Works for Hire.
In most countries, it's life of the last composer or author plus 50 or 70 years. One has to look up the individual country. There are exceptions -- the best known is that copyright never expires for German born composers in Germany.
This should be general knowledge for anyone who composes or arranges music. Two excellent books on the subject are these. If you plan to make music for a living, invest in your career and buy both. Both are available in print and Kindle editions:
All You Need to Know About the Music Business: Eighth Edition Hardcover by Donald S. Passman
http://www.amazon.com/Need-Know-About-Music-Business/dp/1451682468
Music Money and Success 7th Edition: The Insider's Guide to Making Money in the Music Business Paperback
by Jeffrey Brabec (Author) , Todd Brabec (Author)
http://www.amazon.com/Music-Money-Success-7th-Edition/dp/0825673690
In reply to In the United States, all by MikeHalloran
Again: do you have any proof for that 'Copyright never expires for German-born composers in Germany'? Who is the Copyright owner of their work?
Here's proof for the contrary: https://dejure.org/gesetze/UrhG/64.html, Copyright Ends 70 years after the death of the artist
In reply to Again: do you have any proof by Jojo-Schmitz
This is easily looked up. Look at the inside cover of any Dover publication of German composers -- they cannot be sold in Germany.
Beethoven Gesellschaft owns the copyrights to his works.
http://www.beethoven-gesellschaft.org/
In reply to This is easily looked up. by MikeHalloran
Copyrights can't be sold, only inherited. and stop to exist 70 years after the death of the composer, period. Check the written law I've linked to above.
Printed and published copies are not free though, they have their own Copyright, held by the Publisher. So you're not allowed to make fotocopies of it and distribute them.
In reply to Copyrights can't be sold, by Jojo-Schmitz
Oh dear, what a murky pool I seem to have stirred up!
I am not sure just how to interpret the messages in this thread in relation to different countries. Is it true for instance that I can make arrangements of Bach or Beethoven but cannot publish them (ie make them available) in Germany due to German copyright law, but I could make them available in say the UK and USA?
SImilarly, are arrangements of, say, Gershwin that I might make allowable in the UK (and elsewhere) because he died in 1937 ie more than 70 years ago, but these are not allowable for distribution in the USA - see Mike Halloran's contribution earlier in this thread-
"In the United States, all music created or published before January 1, 1923 is under copyright. Works published before Jan 1, 1978 are protected for 95 years; works published after are protected for the life of the last surviving composer or author plus 70 years."
In my example above, Gershwin compositions would would presumably fall into the "protected for 95 years" category.
Am I correct therefore in thinking that, as a general rule, I can make arrangements of works where the composer died more than 70 years ago, for use in the UK, even if they are under copyright in other countries (as in the apparent cases of Beethoven and Germany)?
Where does this place websites such as "Free-scores.com??"
The whole area seems to be a minefield. I do know that a composer/arranger friend of mine spends considerable amounts of time seeking permission for his work, in one case still trying after 2 years to get permission to arrange a piece of music that others have already arranged - probably illegally.
In reply to This is easily looked up. by MikeHalloran
I am reading https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_law_of_Germany#Exclusive_right_… and looking around elsewhere, and am not seeing support for idea that Beethoven's music would still be under copyright protection in Germany. A particular *edition* of his music might be, sure, just as particular *editions* are in any other country, and Germany does indeed have some unique aspects to their law, but I see nothing supporting the idea that his music itself is protected. Can you point to a specific source?
Just to be clear, musescore.com does have a system to "Report abuse" (see the footer of this page), and they definitely do take down music if there are complaints. I think as long as you comply immediately when the takedown notice comes it's unlikely to be pursued further—but it's definitely better not to share it if it's under copyright.
In reply to Just to be clear, by Isaac Weiss
Correct me if I'm wrong on this:
The melody is the only copywrite item. Let's take the Beatles "Yellow Submarine". If I change the melody by one note and change the name to "Yellow Submariner", I would no longer be violating the copywrite.
In reply to Correct me if I'm wrong on by rwmol
You are wrong on this :-). You would have to change *much* more than one note in order for it not to be recognized as substantially similar.
But it *is* true - so far, at least, in the US anyhow - that if you write a totally new melody over the original chord progression, you are good.
In reply to You are wrong on this :-). by Marc Sabatella
What about the arrangements? ???
I mean, following with the Lennon&McCartney master piece, if I take the full original "Yellow Submarine" melody, but I change the chords, the instruments, add some rhythmical parts, change the rhythm signature, etc., etc., etc. (I'm talking about something like the George Martin instrumental version of this piece, included on the original LP), in that case, Do I still need the author permission to publish and share it, for free, in MuseScore.com? ???
In reply to What about the arrangements? by jotape1960
Best to consult a lawyer for specifics for your particular country, but in general, if the melody is recognizable as the same to a judge who is probably not a musician, you need permission.
In reply to What about the arrangements? by jotape1960
My understanding is chord progressions and rhythms and form can be copied without infringing, as long as the melody isn't copied.
To bypass copyright restrictions, some bebop musicians like to make "contrafactions" where they take the same exact chord progression & form of a song, but create a new melody.
I know a safe solution: let alone what someone else wrote and write your own music.
Ah, looks like here in Italy one can't even give away his own music for free, as he has to pay some sort of royalty to the SIAE and receive a kind of a stamp to stick on his CD's (or whatever). I hope I'm wrong and the one who told me so was just pulling my leg, but one can never be sure.
That said, looks like my previous "safe solution" is not so safe, after all. There's a better one -- let alone music and buy a fishing net. What? You have to pay for a fishing license, too? GOSH!!! I see. Shoot a bullet into your brain an forget it all. That's a safe solution for sure.
In reply to I know a safe solution: let by Aldo
Normally I wouldn't ask someone to add the words "just kidding" to a clearly ironic statement, but with that second-to-last sentence I feel it's necessary.
In reply to Normally I wouldn't ask by Isaac Weiss
I intended to be sarcastic, that's for sure. But not from my second statement, just from "That said, looks like--" on. Believe it or not, what I wrote in my first two paragraphs is not humorous at all (particularly the second one).
In reply to I intended to be sarcastic, by Aldo
I suspect either your friend misunderstood the law or you misunderstood him. While it is possible Italy has some unique laws here, I am guessing that it is actually the same as most other countries: you are certainly not required to join any organization to publish your music, but it would be next to impossible for you to collect royalties from that music without the help of such an organization. In Italy, there is indeed a tax paid on blank CD's and other media to offset the expected losses from illegal duplication; other countries have tried or considered such laws too.
In reply to I intended to be sarcastic, by Aldo
By "second-to-last", I mean the sentence that starts "Shoot."
In reply to By "second-to-last", I mean by Isaac Weiss
Ah! Of course, I was kidding when talking about suicide. :) By the way, I just discovered that my friend was not pulling my leg: http://tinyurl.com/oman9h8
Klávesy