New special page for admins and copyright review request

[imslp]

Well... apparently I can't stop writing code. And so here's the latest special page, in addition to an expansion of the tagging system to allow for discussion in the system itself:

http://imslp.org/wiki/Special:IMSLPRecentTagFinder

Also, the copyright review request is about Reger's Complete Edition by B&Hartel in the 60s... I think it passes due to the German urtext law, but would welcome Carolus to correct me if I'm wrong

[Carolus]

The vast majority of Reger's works were first issued by Aibl and Peters. As I recall, the B & H complete edition didn't even re-engrave the majority of works but merely reprinted the originals with minor corrections. Reger (d. 1916) would have gone PD in Germany back in 1967.

I seriously doubt that most, if not all, of the complete edition would have qualified for even the limited 25 year term granted for re-engraving.

[Carolus]

On the copyright tagging page, I think it might be helpful if it would be possible to change something from "public domain" to "CC-NC-SA" or "Personal" if one of the uploaders of new typesets really doesn't want something to be fully public domain.

At the moment the only way to deal with this is to manually edit the page and change the copyright values... the valid values currently are as follows:

Public Domain
Creative Commons ShareAlike 2.5
Creative Commons NonCommercial-ShareAlike 2.5
Personal

(the version 3.0 variants also are valid, and are used by the newer add file pages, also note that capitalization does matter)

The reason I'm currently hesitant to make this an off-wiki thing (i.e. like the current admin tagging system) is that it would make changes much harder to track; where as the admin tagging system is open and used only by a small group of people who we all know rather well (online), I think rather important changes such as copyright type may be better done on the page itself, so that it is clear who did what (writing a full revision control system is very hard, which is why such a thing does not exist for the admin tagging system).

Your tagging page seems to be working fine, BTW. It's already saved tiime by making it possible to addres things directly instead of putting up endless posts on the forum. Great job!

Thank you! Or rather, I should be thanking *you* for all the work you are doing to identify the copyright status on works

[Carolus]

Thanks for the list. I thought I noticed some sort of Mutopia type of copyright claim (which is probably similar to CC-NC-SA). Another thing that crossed my mind is that when someone uploads a retypeset by another person, like Rex Mager's upload of Paul Stetsenko's arrangement of a Bach Cantata movement, we should also ask the author (Stetsenko in this example) whether they wish this to be fully public domain or something more limited like the CC-SA, CC-NC-SA or Personal.

Might there be a way to program the "add file" page so that it would default to CC-NC-SA or even Personal if the person adding the file selects "Typeset" as the option? Might save us time asking questions of folks via e-mail.

[imslp]

This is technically possible, but would require javascript which I'm not familiar with (have never written it before)...

If you feel like asking the submitters that is fine, though because it was the submitter who submitted the file him/herself, you can just pass it ("Verified") in the review process if the burden of notifying the submitter is too much. I think that if the submitter had wanted to control the submission in any way (non-commerical, etc.) he/she'd have been familiar with the various licenses, and would know to chose a different license upon submission. I'm assuming here you are talking about re-typesets that the submitter him/herself did?

In any case, it *would* be nice if someone knows enough Javascript to write such a function as to prevent possible misunderstandings

About Stetsenko, I've already asked Regermax: http://imslp.org/wiki/User_talk:Rexmager#Paul_Stetsenko, so everything should be fine

[Carolus]

I was actually thinking more about submitters who submit retypesets done by other people, the Stetsenko typesets being a perfect example. If someone is submitting their own engravings, they are responsible for determining the extent of protection for themselves. This all ties into the presence WIMA and Mutopia files also.

What I would hope to avoid (as much as possible) would be a situation where Submitter A uploaded Editor/Typesetter B's file as "public domain", after which Publisher C downloaded, printed and sold Editor/Typesetter B's work sans credit or renumeration which caused Editor/Typesetter B to become upset and file suit against Submitter A, IMSLP and Publisher C. This is not as likely as it may first appear, since all Publisher C's I know would not take any claim of "public domain" appearing on IMSLP at face value without independent verification. Paul Howarth's asking that his Sullivan re-engravings be removed, even though I was very careful to list them as his personal copyright when I posted them here at IMSLP, brought this to mind. The fact that we're paranoid doesn't mean they aren't out to get us, after all

[imslp]

You know, I'm thinking about adding a speedy deletion rule: if a re-typesetted file and the submission of it contains no information whatsoever about the source or concrete copyright claims (by concrete I mean in the file itself), then it should be speedily deleted, and a note left on the submitter's page (good idea to set up a template for this). This should both decrease the burden on the admins and increase the submission quality on IMSLP.

If there are no objections I will make this official policy soon

[Carolus]

I think this is a very good idea. Of course, if the poster lists a re-engraving as a "manuscript" or a "normal scan" it would have a chance of falling through the cracks. Even so, the recent postings of Isaac San Miguel, who does not yet appear to grasp that some things are protected and best left unposted, demonstrate the need for something like this.

I noticed that the accented E in Debussy's Epigraphs Antiques does not appear to alphabetize properly.

BTW, IMSLP has more than 3000 titles. Congratulations!

[imslp]

I think this is a very good idea. Of course, if the poster lists a re-engraving as a "manuscript" or a "normal scan" it would have a chance of falling through the cracks. Even so, the recent postings of Isaac San Miguel, who does not yet appear to grasp that some things are protected and best left unposted, demonstrate the need for something like this.

Added as official policy. Even if it is listed as a manuscript or scan it should have been reviewed by one admin at some point at least... so wrongful categorization should be caught at some point After all re-engravings usually have a distinct feel to it. Another way to distinguish them is to try to copy text from them. If it is truly a re-engraving, Acrobat will allow you to copy the text on the page as text.

I noticed that the accented E in Debussy's Epigraphs Antiques does not appear to alphabetize properly.

This is a known problem.... I'm not sure I know how to fix it (or even if it's fixable; it seems like a MySQL issue and not a MediaWiki one), but will look into it in due course

BTW, IMSLP has more than 3000 titles. Congratulations!

Yep! IMSLP is growing nice and fast... the visitor numbers are also growing by something like 30% each month