Copyrighted score

[kosboot]

Someone uploaded this file: http://imslp.org/wiki/File:PMLP506731-C ... _Op.11.pdf

Even with the publisher information deleted, it's easy to tell this is a Henle edition and therefore in copyright.

[Choralia]

If it's the Henle edition, it is certainly to be regarded as a "Urtext" edition because the "Urtext" attribute is clearly specified by Henle on their catalogue.

According to Worldcat, the Henle edition was published in 1987, and therefore it is public domain in all countries where copyright protection on "Urtext" editions lasts 25 years from publication or less (in practice, all EU countries plus other countries that have adopted similar provisions, sometimes under a slightly different concept - e.g., the so-called "typographical copyright").

Copyright reviewers will probably classify it as PD-EU, so it will be supposedly moved to the EU server soon.

Max

[coulonnus]

But in addition to its urtextness it has fingerings, making it a derivative work (already discussed elsewhere). If there is some interest I am ready to remove the fingerings and... clean it!

And even for PD scores it is nice to credit the publisher.

[Carolus]

Yes, it's the ol' Henle boobytrap again. The item is from a 1987 collection and would be fine under our so-called "urtext" rule if the fingerings of Hans-Martin Theopold were removed (over 25 years old). The actual literal translation of the term employed by Germany's section 70 is "Scientific Edition" - so "urtext" is really a marketing term at least half the time it's employed. Henle's editions are often kind of a hybrid - the music itself is usually indeed 'urtext' in the sense most folks employ the term, but they like to add fingerings and other editorial enhancements, sometimes by big-name artists. The collection itself might not be eligible of upload as it could represent an original compilation - which would entitle it to life plus 50 of the compiler of the collection - even if the individual items contained within were fair game. If someone else came up wth the same set of works back in the day though, it would not pass the threshold of originality for a collection. Likewise, if it were a very un-original new compilation like 'works composed between #### and ####', the collection wouldn't meet the threshold.

[coulonnus]

But the copyright-reviewers' opinion vary, e.g. http://imslp.org/wiki/Piano_Trio_in_G_m ... y,_Claude)

[coulonnus]

If I click on #454105 I still see an image of the fingered version at the top of the page. Same if I right-click in the icon in the Thumbnail column, at the line of the current version and ask to display the image.

Can an Admin correct this please?