Project Gutenberg Volunteers Partial IMSLP Hosting

bbc writes "Project Gutenberg has volunteered to host all it legally can of the IMSLP's catalog. The Canadian provider of free public domain music recently caved to legal threats from an Austrian sheet music seller. On the Book People mailing list, Project Gutenberg's founder Michael Hart wrote: 'Project Gutenberg has volunteered to keep as much of the IMSL Project online as is legally possible, including a few of the items that were demanded to be withdrawn, as well as, when legal, to provide a backup of the entire site, for when the legalities have finally been worked out.'"

someone think of the musicians

[El_Muerte_TDS (592157)]

But how will those dead musicians make a living when their work is available for free on the internet.

Re:

[Fred_A (10934)]

Well *I*'m not sitting in the front row when they're touring.
Don't want any body parts falling on me.

What in the?

[downix (84795)]

So, is Universal claiming copyright that was never given, by shutting down the sharing of sheet music irrelevent to its case? I do not understand where Universals basis for claim is for shutting down an entire site. By that logic, if I find Universal happens to have copied a screenplay of mine, I can claim that they must pull all of their movies out of the theatres and off of DVD shelves immediately.

Re:

[Ed Avis (5917)]

Universal didn't request the shutdown of the whole site, only that it stop distributing works still under US copyright. I think the site was hosted in Canada, so the legality of this is arguable (IANAL); but anyway, closing the whole site was the site owner's choice, since he didn't have time to carefully remove all of the still-copyright works.

Re:What in the?

[CRCulver (715279)]

Universal Edition the music publisher (not "Universal", the global media company) didn't shut down the entire site. They demanded filtering based on IP address (= geographical location) be installed so that you could only see the scores out of copyright in your own country, and not those that are still under copyright where you live though available elsewhere. The owner, who was already stressed out after years of doing this, decided himself to shut it all down.

Re:

[gstoddart (321705)]

They demanded filtering based on IP address (= geographical location) be installed so that you could only see the scores out of copyright in your own country, and not those that are still under copyright where you live though available elsewhere.

So, if someone started coming to an American company with a claim that they should be filtering all of the things which are illegal in, say, Iran ... would the American companies tell them to go fsck themselves, or would they happily comply? (Or, in this case, I gu

Re:

[Actually, I do RTFA (1058596)]

So, if someone started coming to an American company with a claim that they should be filtering all of the things which are illegal in, say, Iran ... would the American companies tell them to go fsck themselves, or would they happily comply? (Or, in this case, I guess an Australian company being asked to censor based off what's legal in Indonesia might be more apt.)

If the US would respect an extradition request from Iran for whatever content is being distributed, I would imagine the American comapany would

Re:

[Kadin2048 (468275)]

If the US would respect an extradition request from Iran for whatever content is being distributed, I would imagine the American comapany would comply (although not happily).

I'm not sure why you think so. I don't think many U.S. judges would bother to enforce a judgment from an Iranian court against a U.S. company that was doing business in the United States, simply because someone in Iran could get on the internet and access their stuff online, and in doing so, violate Iranian laws.

The enforcement of foreign judgments in the U.S. is governed by "Uniform Foreign Money-Judgments Recognition Act, 13 U.L.A. 149 (1986)", which I don't have time to read through at the moment, but W

Re:

[Actually, I do RTFA (1058596)]

They would sure based on where the downloader is, not where the company is located.

IANAL

Re:

[gstoddart (321705)]

It is Austria, which is located south of germany (and is a member of the EU), and not Australia.

Oh, crap. How did I miss that? :-P

Thanks for the correction.

Cheers

I was waiting for this...

[FredDC (1048502)]

I was expecting someone or some organisation to step up and help out. Congratulations are in order to Project Gutenberg, I would say. We can't let the **AA's bully us into following their ideas about art/music/movies/...

Re:

[CRCulver (715279)]

Universal Edition, though clearly doing the wrong thing here, is not an *AA. The MPAA and the RIAA fight against the distribution of recordings. Universal Edition is a music publisher, like ASCAP/BMI, Boosey & Hawkers, or EWH.

Re:

[FredDC (1048502)]

They may not be an **AA in name, but they sure seem to be following their stategy perfectly IMHO...

Re:I was waiting for this...

[CRCulver (715279)]

The RIAA and MPAA fill P2P networks with dummy info, prosecute you directly if you share your hard drive, and go after grannies who obviously don't have a clue about filesharing. Universal Edition, on the other hand, says "Hey, you can share those scores in most countries, but in this territory we still have copyright". That is nothing like the big music labels and film industry. I am not defending them, since I think copyright is a silly idea and a peculiar recent Western European innovation that most of the world rightly rejects, but let's have some perspective here.

Re:

[poot_rootbeer (188613)]

I think copyright is a silly idea and a peculiar recent Western European innovation that most of the world rightly rejects

163 of the world's 194 (or so; depends on who's counting) countries are parties to the Berne Convention [wikipedia.org]; several more are parties to other multilateral copyright treaties.

I'm not sure how you figure that less than 15% of the world (by number of countries; by population or by economic power, the percentage is far, far lower) constitutes "most of the world".

Re:

[CRCulver (715279)]

The national legislatures of countries have signed copyright agreements, but their populations could care less about copyright. From Spain to Vietnam, you can buy CDs and DVDs openly on the streets, people download the music they want with no qualms, and if you talk with them about copyright, most people will not agree that creators can restrict who can access their work once it is released.

Re:

[phantomcircuit (938963)]

You reject copyright?

Without copyright there would be no reason for anybody to be in the software business.

This is the Information Age, if I can't sell information that I own then I have nothing to sell.

Re:

[Kadin2048 (468275)]

This is the Information Age, if I can't sell information that I own then I have nothing to sell.

Then you deserve to starve.

Here's a hint: you can sell your labor, just like most of the people who are alive or who have ever lived, have done. That works just as well for computer programmers as it does for plumbers, doctors, and lawyers. Negotiate a fair price for your time, get paid up front, and let the buyer do whatever the hell they want to do with the stuff you produce for them.

Welcome to the service economy; it's the same as the old economy.

Re:

[roystgnr (4015)]

copyright is a silly idea and a peculiar recent Western European innovation that most of the world rightly rejects

There's lots of people even in the West who reject respecting copyrights themselves, because the result of "someone else will pay for it" gets them lots of free stuff, and free stuff is awesome. There are fewer people anywhere who reject the idea of requiring others to respect copyrights, because the result of "nobody will pay for it" might cause the supply of free new stuff to dry up.

On the ot

Re:I was waiting for this...NICELY????

[Nom du Keyboard (633989)]

Universal Edition, on the other hand, says "Hey, you can share those scores in most countries, but in this territory we still have copyright".

They sure didn't say that very nicely? It was like: OBEY, OR DIE! Obey the EU directives, or our Canadian lawyer will get you good!

Re:

[Kadin2048 (468275)]

Yes, but what Universal was saying is that it's the archive's responsibility to limit access to only those scores that people are legally allowed to view.

This is a bizarre stance and I don't believe there's any possible way they could get it upheld (although maybe in the E.U. and in Canada, who knows), but it was enough to scare the site owner into taking the whole thing down.

I can think of a bunch of similarly contentious issues that never were forced to go that route: up until fairly recently, you couldn'

fmm.

[apodyopsis (1048476)]

by which I can assume there is still a lot of money to be made from music that is clearly beyond copyright?

after all I would hazard a guess this is all about money, not copyright.

well done Project Gutenberg.

Re:fmm.

[gEvil (beta) (945888)]

after all I would hazard a guess this is all about money, not copyright.

Considering copyright itself is about money, I would say you are correct.

Re:

[Rogerborg (306625)]

It is about money, but indirectly.

If OmniCorp Music can whip up some outrage by pointing at people breaching their 90 year copyrights (regardless of medium or profit), then when Omnicorp Film want to buy a hundred or hundred and fifty year duration law, they'll be able to hire less expensive lobbyists and give smaller 'campaign donations' to fewer Senators.

Re:

[Teancum (67324)]

I highly doubt that any substantial copyright extension in terms of term duration is going to happen, at least in America, without a huge political fight happening at the same time. Certainly it is getting to the point of absurdity, and it is possible that if a bill comes up before congress to change the length of the copyright term, that it might even result in a reduction of the length of the copyright instead of an increase... if only because the issue will be put before congressmen with people who are

Re:

[Rogerborg (306625)]

I have some vacation time coming up; is the weather on your planet nice this time of year?

Re:

[ConceptJunkie (24823)]

Wow, the media companies still need lobbyists for Congress? I thought they just yanked the chain connected to the Congressmen's dog collars. Maybe there's hope for this country yet.

Re:

[Solandri (704621)]

by which I can assume there is still a lot of money to be made from music that is clearly beyond copyright?

The music is beyond copyright. The graphical representation of that music on paper is still under copyright. The folks publishing all this out-of-copyright music just come up with a new arrangement and typesetting every couple decades and get a brand-new copyright on it. The older publications fall into the public domain, and some are available [duke.edu] in various places [redhost24-001.com] if you know where to look [indiana.edu]. Unfortun

Donations

[ta bu shi da yu (687699)]

How does one donate to Project Gutenberg?

Re:Donations

[Lonedar (897073)]

There is a PayPal link on the main site: http://www.gutenberg.org/wiki/Main_Page [gutenberg.org]

And I think that Project Gutenberg is one of the best initiatives on the Internet.
Where else could you get, for free, electronic versions of books in the public domain? And they provide multiple file formats as well.

Transcriptions

[oliverthered (187439)]

Now all we need is someone to stand up to the music industry shutting down tabliture sites that contain peoples interpretations of music.

Re:

[oliverthered (187439)]

it's ok so long as it's your interpretation and you don't actually copy any of the original work. (which in this case would be sheet music or tabliture)

The BBC had a news article not so long ago where a picture wasn't allowed to be shown on TV because the owners refused to release copyright, so all the BBC done was to get someone to paint a picture of that picture and show the painting on TV.

Re:

[Teancum (67324)]

I don't know how this applies to UK law, but in America that would still be illegal. It would be called a "derivative work", and you would still have to get the copyright permission from the original photographer in order to publicly display such an image. In the case of a painting of a photograph, you would need the copyright permission of both the photographer as well as the artist who made the painting.

There aren't easy "loopholes" for copyright law, and attempts to do so like you are mentioning are go

Re:

[oliverthered (187439)]

hmm... UK law may be different than US law, but I was speaking to a guy who said all those imitation fonts are possible because of the copying process I described. I've never herd anything saying that they are illegal in the states.

How would anyone ever be able to produce anything that anyone else has ever done, if I put a keypad on my phone just like another company has a keypad on their phone am I suddenly breaking copyright law because our products have the sameish/copied features?

Michael Hart seems like a good guy

[blind biker (1066130)]

Noting much to add - I just thought such goodness ought to be acknowledged. I've given up on the imslp surviving this crysis. Surprisingly, humanity (part of it) proved me wrong! I think "w00t!" is appropriate.

Thanks Michael!

Project Gutenberg?

[hal2814 (725639)]

The US military recently tried to shut down Project Gutenberg's hosting server. Project Gutenberg listened to the server's cries of "No disassemble!" and with the help of Project Sheedy, helped the server to safety.

Whack-a-mole

[c (8461)]

Funny thing about playing whack-a-mole on the Internet... the moles get bigger, bring lawyers, and carry their own mallets.

They acted like dicks (hint: if first contact involves lawyers, you're a dick) towards someone who, had they approached nicely, might have been willing to cooperate. Now they've moved their problem to an organized group who already knows how to deal with these sorts of things and isn't likely to back down against empty threats.

WOW this is nuts

[Anon-Admin (443764)]

After RTFA and looking up the letter [imslpforums.org] I am in shock!


They are saying that because the copyright is 50 years past the death of the author in Canada, 70 years past the death of the author in Europe, and the number varies in other countries, that the IMSLP (International Music Score Library Project) should be filtering IP's of people in those countries and enforcing the copyright lengths. Just because the work is Public domain in Canada does not mean that it is public domain in the USA and Europe. Thus they

Re:WOW this is nuts

[Richard_J_N (631241)]

De facto, permissions on the net are the logical OR of the permissions in the various jurisdictions. I.e, if activity X is permitted anywhere, it is permitted everywhere. (This is just another way to say that the internet treats censorship as damage, and routes around it).

This is quite clearly a good thing, and the Right thing. However, some legal jurisdictions haven't caught up with the modern world yet.

Where is Google?

[Nom du Keyboard (633989)]

And where is Google in all this? I would have expected them to be the first to be hosting Google Sheet Music.

Project Gutenberg's Problem

[Nom du Keyboard (633989)]

Project Gutenberg's problem is that they're not in Canada themselves, and hence find themselves under USA law and all the stupid treaties they've signed along the way.

Re:Classical music is the new Rock'n'Roll

[pla (258480)]

Classical music is the new Rock'n'Roll

...Or something like that [youtube.com], anyway...

(Just in case anyone needed more evidence that pretty much everything "new" still contains 99% things-that-came-before, making the idea of copyrights absolutely absurd...)

Re:

[Teancum (67324)]

This becomes even more interesting when you consider that some musicians have been able to, successfully, sue for copyright infringement based upon copying six notes from another song. They didn't even have the same tempo or rhythm, just the same six notes played in order. So how many combinations of six notes can you come up with that havn't already been done before?

I thought that this was an absurd legal opinion, and if really pushed it may eventually be overturned... at least with some future court cas

Re:

[c_forq (924234)]

The King James version of the bible is only under copyright in the UK, due to its copyright being owned by the crown. In the U.S. it is under no restrictions. As for the claim the William Shakespere had anything to do with it, that is completely new to me. I'll admit it has been a while, but last time I looked into the issue I thought the translating committee largely used Tyndale's translation. I seem to recall an extremely large amount of verses being identical or extremely similar to Tyndale's work.

Letters Patent

[Kadin2048 (468275)]

The KJV really isn't under "copyright" in the U.K. It's protected by royal prerogative using an different legal instrument, called a "letters patent." This is copyright-like, but it's not recognized internationally; unlike true copyrights which get extended pretty much everywhere by way of the Berne Convention, letters patent only affect people in the U.K.

In the 70s (or somewhere around then), when the original Gilbert and Sullivan copyrights were about to expire, there were some people who wanted to have

Re:I don't even understand that sentence.

[urcreepyneighbor (1171755)]

Project Gutenberg [gutenberg.org] - the first and largest single collection of free electronic books - has volunteered to host IMSLP's (International Music Score Library Project) collection of scores.

Related story: Provider of Free Public Domain Music Shuts Down [slashdot.org]

Props to Gutenberg. Donate [gutenberg.org] if you can spare a few bucks.

Re:

[Professor_UNIX (867045)]

Go type IMSLP into Google and you'll have your answer as the first hit. Quit being such a god damn lazy grammar nazi.

Re:

[tietokone-olmi (26595)]

Pardon me, but I believe the correct expression here is "member of the national socialist worker's party of Germany, style of expression subdepartment". Please report to the incinerator at your earliest convenience. Heil Hitler!

Re:

[mcmonkey (96054)]

Go type IMSLP into Google and you'll have your answer as the first hit. Quit being such a god damn lazy grammar nazi.

You mean this [teachersnetwork.org], the first result for IMSL Project [google.com]. Or this [vni.com], the first result for IMSL [google.com]?

If we need to take a little initiative and lookup these initalisms ourselves, perhaps the editors can take a little initiative and at least be consistent with the initialisms they use.

Re:

[gbnewby (74175)]

We (Project Gutenberg) haven't received anything from IMSLP yet, and depending on how easy it is to identify materials that are public domain in thUS, we might not be able to immediately redistribute it. But I did correspond with the person who runs IMSLP (when the issue first came up, not just recently) and do anticipate we'll be able to help. It's great to see the /. coverage of Michael's note to the BookPeople mailing list (the main link in the slashdot story thread), but at this point there's not a lo