Hi. Is there any kind of official statement or PG policy concerning works licensed under a Creative Commons license? Are such works acceptable? Also, is there anyone maintaining the PG music archive? I am asking because I know of several composers of classic MIDI files. I am planning to ask them to consider licensing their works under a Creative Commons type license. I can also mention Project Gutenberg and/or drop a name of someone for them to contact if they want or will allow PG to distribute their works. This would be good for PG because some composers have done a lot of classical music from a number of pre-1922 compositions. I don't think I can help with sheet music, and of course I have no way of knowing that the sheet music sources they used are in the public domain. I know that some of them also make various files available in mp3, but I don't think they offer other formats. Is this something I should consider on behalf of PG or not? If PG is interested in something like this, I would also ask them to consider just releasing their files into the public domain, but I doubt if that will happen. Thanks, and feel free to write me off list if it's easier. Tony Baechler Maintainer, goldenaudio.net (TM) online archives http://goldenaudio.net/
On Sat, May 21, 2005 at 09:01:17PM -0700, Tony Baechler wrote:
Hi. Is there any kind of official statement or PG policy concerning works licensed under a Creative Commons license? Are such works acceptable?
If you look at V.71 in the FAQ, you will see the exact minimum terms that PG needs to post a copyrighted book: "perpetual, worldwide, non-exclusive rights to distribute this book in electronic form through Project Gutenberg Web sites, CDs or other current and future formats. No royalties are due for these rights." Whether the medium of transfer of these rights is a letter, or a CC license, or a handwritten note attached to a pigeon's leg doesn't really matter. Do, however, remember that not all CC licenses are the same. Most of the "usual" CC licenses work for us, but, for example, the "Founders Copyright" CC license doesn't. We had the CC question with Cory Doctorow's first novel, and in that case he refused to give us a specific permission to publish his novel, on the basis that doing so would undermine the intent of his CC license, so we went ahead based on the CC license alone. A rather elegant exchange, that was. We can also take the GFDL, and any other published intent on the part of the copyright holder that gives us the rights we need to do it.
Also, is there anyone maintaining the PG music archive?
No.
I am asking because I know of several composers of classic MIDI files. I am planning to ask them to consider licensing their works under a Creative Commons type license. I can also mention Project Gutenberg and/or drop a name of someone for them to contact if they want or will allow PG to distribute their works. This would be good for PG because some composers have done a lot of classical music from a number of pre-1922 compositions. I don't think I can help with sheet music, and of course I have no way of knowing that the sheet music sources they used are in the public domain. I know that some of them also make various files available in mp3, but I don't think they offer other formats. Is this something I should consider on behalf of PG or not? If PG is interested in something like this, I would also ask them to consider just releasing their files into the public domain, but I doubt if that will happen. Thanks, and feel free to write me off list if it's easier.
I'm a little unclear about what we're talking about here. You're saying "composers", which implies original work or original arrangement of a work, but from pre-1923. A direct note-for-note copy of sheet music from the public domain to a new format like MIDI would never be copyrighted in the first place, at least in the USA, so a CC license would not apply. Only derivative works would, and then, in either case, the PD status of the original would need to be demonstrated: there's an awful lot of sheet music out there now that has been put into copyright by some editing or arrangement post-1923. This is one of those things that is difficult to discuss in the abstract; you'd need to establish clearance on a case-by-case basis, and you'd have to establish it with Greg, since he signs off on the not-straightforward cases. I can tell you that if you produce TP&V of the pre-23 sheet music, you can then clear that piece, and submit it in any format. jim
On 5/22/05, Jim Tinsley <jtinsley@pobox.com> wrote:
We had the CC question with Cory Doctorow's first novel, and in that case he refused to give us a specific permission to publish his novel, on the basis that doing so would undermine the intent of his CC license, so we went ahead based on the CC license alone.
What about his second book?
On Sun, May 22, 2005 at 03:21:37PM -0500, David Starner wrote:
On 5/22/05, Jim Tinsley <jtinsley@pobox.com> wrote:
We had the CC question with Cory Doctorow's first novel, and in that case he refused to give us a specific permission to publish his novel, on the basis that doing so would undermine the intent of his CC license, so we went ahead based on the CC license alone.
What about his second book?
It's on my list of things to do when I don't have more urgent things to do. :-) Besides, after his license change on the first, I wasn't in a hurry to start on the second when it came out. jim
At 11:00 AM 5/22/2005 -0400, you wrote:
a CC license, or a handwritten note attached to a pigeon's leg doesn't really matter. Do, however, remember that not all CC licenses are the same. Most of the "usual" CC licenses work for us, but, for example, the "Founders Copyright" CC license doesn't.
This is exactly what I was wondering about. Are you familiar with the CC 2.0 licenses? All require attribution. I am not familiar with the license you mentioned above, so I think that might have been phased out. That's why I asked if CC licenses are acceptable since I know there are different licenses that the authors or performers can use. Which ones are not OK for PG?
I'm a little unclear about what we're talking about here. You're saying "composers", which implies original work or original arrangement of a work, but from pre-1923. A direct note-for-note copy of sheet music from the public domain to a new format like MIDI would never be copyrighted in the first place, at least in the USA, so a CC license would not apply.
OK, sorry I was unclear on this. I guess I used improper wording. According to almost all sites with classical MIDI works, i.e. performances based on the sheet music, there seems to be two different issues. One is the sheet music itself, which of course is in the public domain. The other is the actual MIDI performances. Almost all performers copyright their MIDI files, using the argument that they are an original performance of a classical work. They would probably acknowledge that the original sheet music is public domain, but their performances aren't. Many are unclear as to what can be done with their files but most allow personal, noncommercial use only.
Only derivative works would, and then, in either case, the PD status of the original would need to be demonstrated: there's an awful lot of sheet music out there now that has been put into copyright by some editing or arrangement post-1923. This is one of those things that is difficult to discuss in the abstract; you'd need to establish clearance on a case-by-case basis, and you'd have to establish it with Greg, since he signs off on the not-straightforward cases.
Unfortunately, I don't have a specific case in mind yet. My idea is to get as much general information on this as possible, draft an email message briefly explaining CC and PG, asking the performers to first consider a CC license and if they are willing to do that, also mention PG, and see what happens. I do have specific sites in mind, but I am wondering if this is something worth pursuing. If there are going to be legal issues to deal with that would prevent PG from accepting the files because of possible clearance issues, I probably won't bother. I have found many artists and performers to be very difficult and generally want all their questions answered up front. They would of course want their rights protected, or at least some rights, which is why I would mention the CC licenses first. If I am going in the wrong direction with this or if anyone has a better approach, please tell me. I would like to see the music archive expand, but I don't want to create lots of unnecessary work for Greg since there might be a chance that the MIDI would not clear anyway.
From: Tony Baechler <tb@baechler.net>
The other is the actual MIDI performances. Almost all performers copyright their MIDI files, using the argument that they are an original performance of a classical work.
I'm not sure how MIDI works. If you give two MIDI composers the exact same sheet music, would there be differences in the files they generated? In other words, does they basically just enter the sheet music and a music file comes out, or is there a task of arrangement that produces a unique file no one else could create exactly on their own?
If there are going to be legal issues to deal with that would prevent PG from accepting the files because of possible clearance issues, I probably won't bother.
One of the posts in one of these threads spelled out exactly what PG requires, perpetual, global, yadda yadda (sorry, I don't remember, and I've deleted the e-mail.) You should look for that, or maybe someone can repost it. Then, you could show the composers, say this is what you would have to grant in your license for PG to use it, and they could give you an answer then and there. PG is noncommercial but not personal, so it sounds like their current terms wouldn't work, unless they were willing to amend. Dave Doty
The other is the actual MIDI performances. Almost all performers copyright their MIDI files, using the argument that they are an original performance of a classical work.
I'm not sure how MIDI works. If you give two MIDI composers the exact same sheet music, would there be differences in the files they generated? In other words, does they basically just enter the sheet music and a music file comes out, or is there a task of arrangement that produces a unique file no one else could create exactly on their own?
MIDI basically records the instruments used, the note sequences, and their timings: so you could presumably convert a music score to a MIDI file by software. No creatibve input required, but you'd just have a mechanical performance. Or you could capture the performance of a live musician: all the subtle or not so subtle timing variations that distinguish that person's style and make it sound unlike a mechanical performance. Whe you do that, you have a file that is is a recording of that person's performance, just as a CD or tape or 78rpm disk is a recording of what that person's performance sounded like. You or I (even if I could play an instrument) couldn't recreate that data from the score. An interesting item on grabbing performance data from recordings: http://edwardwillett.blogspot.com/2005/05/live-performances-from-dead-pianis...
The other is the actual MIDI performances. Almost all performers copyright their MIDI files, using the argument that they are an original
Could we create sheet music from Fats Waller records then? I'd go for that! ----- Original Message ----- From: "Malcolm Farmer" <malcolm.farmer@gmail.com> To: "Project Gutenberg Volunteer Discussion" <gutvol-d@lists.pglaf.org> Sent: Monday, May 23, 2005 10:12 AM Subject: Re: [gutvol-d] PG and Creative Commons performance
of a classical work.
I'm not sure how MIDI works. If you give two MIDI composers the exact same sheet music, would there be differences in the files they generated? In other words, does they basically just enter the sheet music and a music file comes out, or is there a task of arrangement that produces a unique file no one else could create exactly on their own?
MIDI basically records the instruments used, the note sequences, and their timings: so you could presumably convert a music score to a MIDI file by software. No creatibve input required, but you'd just have a mechanical performance. Or you could capture the performance of a live musician: all the subtle or not so subtle timing variations that distinguish that person's style and make it sound unlike a mechanical performance. Whe you do that, you have a file that is is a recording of that person's performance, just as a CD or tape or 78rpm disk is a recording of what that person's performance sounded like. You or I (even if I could play an instrument) couldn't recreate that data from the score.
An interesting item on grabbing performance data from recordings:
http://edwardwillett.blogspot.com/2005/05/live-performances-from-dead-pianis ts.html
_______________________________________________ gutvol-d mailing list gutvol-d@lists.pglaf.org http://lists.pglaf.org/listinfo.cgi/gutvol-d
On 5/23/05 7:45 AM, "Dave Doty" <davedoty@hotmail.com> wrote:
From: Tony Baechler <tb@baechler.net>
The other is the actual MIDI performances. Almost all performers copyright their MIDI files, using the argument that they are an original performance of a classical work.
I'm not sure how MIDI works. If you give two MIDI composers the exact same sheet music, would there be differences in the files they generated? In other words, does they basically just enter the sheet music and a music file comes out, or is there a task of arrangement that produces a unique file no one else could create exactly on their own?
Most musicians I know who create midi (all for their own projects) use a midi keyboard to capture a performance (which, in my view, is an interpretation) of a given work. I don't think I know anyone who creates MIDI files from public domain sheet music for online distribution, so I don't know if my musician friends are exceptions and not the rule. Alex. -- http://www.telltaleweekly.org - Funding a Free Audiobook Library http://www.alexwilson.com - Alex Wilson Studios LLC
On Mon, May 23, 2005 at 10:55:35AM -0400, Alex Wilson wrote:
On 5/23/05 7:45 AM, "Dave Doty" <davedoty@hotmail.com> wrote:
From: Tony Baechler <tb@baechler.net>
The other is the actual MIDI performances. Almost all performers copyright their MIDI files, using the argument that they are an original performance of a classical work.
I'm not sure how MIDI works. If you give two MIDI composers the exact same sheet music, would there be differences in the files they generated? In other words, does they basically just enter the sheet music and a music file comes out, or is there a task of arrangement that produces a unique file no one else could create exactly on their own?
Most musicians I know who create midi (all for their own projects) use a midi keyboard to capture a performance (which, in my view, is an interpretation) of a given work. I don't think I know anyone who creates MIDI files from public domain sheet music for online distribution, so I don't know if my musician friends are exceptions and not the rule.
Alex.
There are some different situations. PG has only a few MIDI files, but most were generated automatically by something like Finale from digitized sheet music. Our view (which is not a settled matter, but our contributors have agreed with) is that such files are public domain. Our Beethoven's 5th, to the contrary, is listed as copyrighted because it came from a performance as Alex described. This stuff is a little vague, and there just isn't enough legal precedent to back it up. So, we go with our usual "sweat of the brow != copyright" for digitizing musical scores, but go with "performance == copyright" for when those scores are "performed." Digital transformations of various types are therefore not copyrighted. But, again, we try to make this clear to contributors, so that we're not labeling something as public domain when they wish to hold a copyright. Case-by-case... -- Greg
participants (8)
-
Alex Wilson -
Dave Doty -
David Starner -
Greg Newby -
Jim Tinsley -
Malcolm Farmer -
N Wolcott -
Tony Baechler