Extent of the Urtext rule

[Carolus]

This subject arose recently on my talk page, so I thought it would be a good idea to post the topic here. We've been following a general rule with respect to critical or urtext editions here allowing those published more than 25 years ago to be posted, with the caveat that they might be available in Canada and the EU only due to the the all-or-nothing nature of the US law. The big question here is how do we treat fingerings when added to such editions. Are fingerings really individual enough to qualify as an original contribution on the editor's part, which propels the term of copyright protection past the 25-year term found spelled out in Section 70 of the German copyright law (20 years in Italy, up to 30 in the EU if the country's law actually addresses the matter)? Keep in mind that this 25-year rule is a voluntary concession on IMSLP's part done as a courtesy to publishers, since there's a good chance that such editions would fail to meet the Canadian threshold of originality to qualify as an 'adaptation' if actually brought before a court - even if they were published only last week.

The Bayerische Staatsbibliothek has scans of a number of urtext editions over 25 years old available, which not only include fingerings, but even full-blown continuo realizations (which might be carrying the "urtext" rubric too far). Obviously, the editor prefaces are certainly original works of authorship and should not be included with any scores posted here. Likewise, continuo realizations made by an editor are probably sufficiently original in nature to exceed the 25-year limitation - though the argument can be made that they (and the prefaces) should be treated as a subsidiary part of the edition itself and therefore fall under the 25-year rule (which might be the case under German law). My own inclination is to treat the editorial fingerings present in an urtext edition as part of the edition itself, and therefore subject to the 25-year term instead of a life-plus term. While I can see the case for fingerings being original to the editor, there are many instances where the fingerings in question are modifications of previous fingerings. Your thoughts and comments are most appreciated, as we do need to set a consistent policy about what should and should not be allowed here.

[daphnis]

Carolus, I agree with your assessment here. Fingerings, after all, are facilitations for the music; they are not distinct contributions on the same scale as the notes and accompanying marks by the composer. Realizations, on the other hand, while being highly descriptive in notation of the composer's directions, also allow sufficient room for artistic flourish and creativity. Those types of contributions (ie those that actually impact the SOUND of the composition) should follow the life + term rubric.

[Melodia]

I can't see how anyone could argue that continuo realizations aren't original enough, unless it's merely block chords.

[reinhold]

I can't see how anyone could argue that continuo realizations aren't original enough, unless it's merely block chords.

The Austrian AKM (www.akm.or.at), the Austrian equivalent to the German GEMA or the French SAGEM, apparently takes the stance that continuo realizations (and even vocal scores!) do not qualify as new works or even adaptions. The main argument seems to be that continuo realizations and piano reductions follow quite strict rules, so that there is no originality in the realization or reductions.

For continuo realizations, I tend to agree, the figured bass is simply a shortcut notation to the chords played.

[Notenschreiber]

Continuo realization has a lot of parameters, which can be chosen freely. I don´t think, that one has
just to translate a short cut notation. Otherwise all computer programs doing continuo realizations
would have the same results. But this is not the case.

[Carolus]

That's really interesting, reinhold. In certain cases I can see their reasoning. For example, making a piano reduction of an operatic full score is relatively simple for some works: take the first violin line as a basis for the RH staff and the bass line as basis for the LH staff, add the vocal and chorus staves. It get's more complicated as orchestration became more specific over time. With continuo realization, the better players often add quite a bit of material over and above block chords.