Slashdot Log In
Provider of Free Public Domain Music Re-Opens
Posted by
kdawson
on Tue Jul 01, 2008 03:58 AM
from the music-wants-to-be-free dept.
from the music-wants-to-be-free dept.
Chip Zoller writes "This community took note when the International Music Score Library Project shut down last October, and when Project Gutenberg stepped in to help three days later. I would like to alert you all that our site, IMSLP, has re-opened to the public for good after a 10-month hiatus. All the news updates in the interim can be found linked to the main page. We take great pride in re-opening as it demonstrates our willpower to make the masterpieces of history free to the world; and moreover to make manifest that we will not be bullied by publishers sporting outrageous claims of copyright in a country where they clearly are expired."
Related Stories
[+]
News: Provider of Free Public Domain Music Shuts Down 242 comments
Mark Rogers writes "The International Music Score Library Project has provided access to copies of many musical scores that are in the public domain. It has just been shut down due to a cease-and-desist letter sent to the site operator by a European Union music publisher (Universal Edition). A majority of the scores recently available at IMSLP were in the public domain worldwide. Other scores were not in the public domain in the United States or the EU (where copyright extends for 70 years after the composer's death), but were legal in Canada (where the site is hosted) and many other countries. The site's maintainers clearly labeled the copyright status of such scores and warned users to follow their respective country's copyright law. Apparently this wasn't enough for Universal Edition, who found it necessary to protect the interests of their (long-dead) composers and shut down a site that has proved useful to many students, professors, and other musicians worldwide."
[+]
Project Gutenberg Volunteers Partial IMSLP Hosting 100 comments
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keep as much of the IMSL Project online as is legally possible, including a few of the items that were demanded to be withdrawn, as well as, when legal, to provide a backup of the entire site, for when the legalities have finally been worked out.'"
Submission: IMSLP re-opens to the public by Anonymous Coward
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
Unfortunately... (Score:5, Funny)
Needed: Cheap Sheet Music Viewer (Score:5, Interesting)
Parent
Re:Needed: Cheap Sheet Music Viewer (Score:4, Interesting)
I was going to say that there isn't enough market out there for that type of thing, but actually, there is. Current eBook/ePaper readers are probably too small. I still don't think you're likely to see an A3 sized ePaper device for cheaper than $800 for quite a few years though! You can't have your cake and eat it as they say. That kind of device really would be awesome though, you could even have a foot control to turn the pages, or have the device turn the page for you when it detects the music has reached that part of the page..
In the meantime, I think a laptop with a 15" or larger screen would do a decent job, and you could pick up a second hand one pretty cheap. Wouldn't have anything like the battery life of an ePaper device though obviously.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
To me it sounds like the solution to your problem is a cheap printer. Or at least that between that and the ones playing it off their laptop screen for free, I don't think there's a market for a specialized device. Standard tablet PC with said software perhaps? Though I've rarely seen those in actual use, so it doesn't surprise me that they're expensive.
I have to say it (Score:3, Interesting)
Good luck with that.
No, really, I mean it. Be prepared to fight the music mafia, worse than you have before. After all, you are presenting a very nasty precedent for them, that copyright on music actually expires and that people can and do make use of it without even asking them first.
I'm certain, though, that their response will be tu purchase a law that extends copyright in your country, too.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Be prepared to fight the music mafia, worse than you have before. After all, you are presenting a very nasty precedent for them, that copyright on music actually expires and that people can and do make use of it without even asking them first.
I don't know about that. We're talking about sheet music and stuff that's been around for a LONG time, so it's not really different from what Project Gutenberg is doing - clearly public domain stuff.
But yes, it's outrageous what people think they can milk money out of. If it were possible, the recording industry would sue you for breathing.
Re:I have to say it (Score:5, Funny)
If it were possible, the recording industry would sue you for breathing.
Of course! That violates the copyright on The Police's "Every Breath You Take" and Pink Floyd's "Breathe."
:-(
I really can imagine the folks at RIAA humming "Every breath you take, every move you make, every bond you break, every step you take, I'll be watching you" as they're running deep packet inspections. Kinda creepy to think of that song as an NSA-FISA surveillance theme song.
I always feel like somebody's watchin' meeeee...
Parent
Re:I have to say it (Score:5, Funny)
Of course! That violates the copyright on The Police's "Every Breath You Take" and Pink Floyd's "Breathe."
Yeah. Occasional breathing would come under fair use as a public performance, but when you're doing it 24/7 then that's taking the proverbial biscuit. People should find a new way of oxygenating their blood instead of being a bunch of damn hippy copyright thieving pirates.
Parent
Re:I have to say it (Score:5, Funny)
I dunno, when I have had girlfriends I didn't pretend they were balloons when kissing them.. could be fun though!
Parent
Re:I have to say it (Score:5, Funny)
Pro tip: there's a difference between kissing and mouth-to-mouth resuscitation.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Now go and listen closely to 'Don't Stand So Close To Me' ;-)
Re:I have to say it (Score:5, Funny)
What creeps me out is that the topic of "Every breath you take" is simply and plainly stalking.
Now go and listen closely to 'Don't Stand So Close To Me' ;-)
Yeah, someone should go call the Police.
Parent
Re:I have to say it (Score:5, Funny)
They could organize a Sting.
Parent
Re:I have to say it (Score:4, Funny)
+1 Coffee coming out of my nose
Parent
Re:I have to say it (Score:5, Interesting)
You know,when I first read the right to read [gnu.org] I thought it was a paranoid fantasy. I now believe like Orwell and Rand RMS has given us a glimpse into the future. I believe that the big desktop PC will eventually go the way of the 8 track,replaced by "media appliances" in the same way that cell phones are phasing out the landlines. When everything ends up hooked to the Internet it won't be hard to have a "WGA" style check done on all your media to check your usage rights,and sites like IMSLP will be relegated to content so old that Henry Ford was still making his Model T and talkies was still a popular name for a movie.
I truly hope I am wrong,I really do. But with the huge warchests the media corps have to buy our laws,and with the US pushing hard for trade agreements that come with DMCAs for everyone,I honestly don't think I am. But I truly wish them luck,for with the unrivaled greed of these large media companies I think they will need it. And as always this is my 02c,YMMV
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I truly hope I am wrong,I really do.
Over the years there have been doomsday prophets, one after the other, but most have been wrong. I agree though that we are in for a rude shock if technology tightens enough so that we can't hack it and we can't share stuff anymore. As things stand currently, I think the movement against DRM is strong and healthy and I'm hopeful we'll manage to giver our grandkids a world that still cares and shares, hopefuly more than it does now.
Re:I have to say it (Score:4, Insightful)
I believe that the big desktop PC will eventually go the way of the 8 track,replaced by "media appliances" in the same way that cell phones are phasing out the landlines. When everything ends up hooked to the Internet it won't be hard to have a "WGA" style check done on all your media to check your usage rights,and sites like IMSLP will be relegated to content so old that Henry Ford was still making his Model T and talkies was still a popular name for a movie.
You think the world is online? You think the world is ever going to BE online? They'd be lucky if they could stop selling Blu-Rays in 100 years or more, in my opinion. Also, anything that doesn't play unsigned music/video is dead on arrival and that's not about to change. They tried putting the cat back in the bag with iTunes/AAC/FairPlay, they tried putting the cat back in the bag with Nlu-Ray/AACS/BD+. I think they're out of options, if you tell people to replace their perfectly working 1080p 7.1 LPCM player that looks and sounds great with something new just so they can try it again it won't work. Try as they may, I don't think they'll ever "unbreak" media.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
We just need to retroactively extend copyright back to the time of the brothers Grimm and we'll see a few corporations change their tune.
Re:I have to say it (Score:5, Informative)
I don't think anyone can really claim to own Bach's Brandenburg Concertos written almost 300 years ago.
The recordings of his concertos, on the other hand, are a different story.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re:I have to say it (Score:5, Funny)
That must be "Hey Jude" by The Beattles.
Parent
Re:I have to say it (Score:4, Informative)
Parent
Re:I have to say it (Score:5, Interesting)
I don't think anyone can really claim to own Bach's Brandenburg Concertos written almost 300 years ago.
You'd think so wouldn't you. But what they do is get an "expert" to reinterpret the score every few years. They write notes, modify some things, etc, etc. I'm not musician, so I can't really comment, but some musician friends of mine really believe that the "new" scores have value.
Anyway, these new reinterpretations have valid copyright. Yes, you can play the ones from 100 years ago, but as one of my friends said, "Why would you want to. They're horrible." Again, I can't really comment either way except to admit to "not getting it".
Parent
New editions of old music (Score:5, Informative)
But what they do is get an "expert" to reinterpret the score every few years.
There are actually very good musical reasons to do this. Music written or printed 300 years ago looks much different than that published today, and often requires an editor's help to bring it into a form usable by modern performers. To give one example, many instrumental sonatas and other works were written out in "figured bass" notation, which gave the keyboard player only the bass line and numeric symbols representing the harmonies. It was up to the player to improvise the right-hand part. Since very few keyboard players these days can do this, editors of modern editions of Baroque music usually provide a written-out interpretation of the chords, which looks just like normal, modern keyboard music. There are also many notational conventions that have either died out completely, or changed their meaning, which need an expert editor to "translate" them for modern players. In addition, many scores of the time were not published, but circulated in handwritten copies, which often contain many mistakes. Modern editors have to sift through the various copies and make judgments as to which versions are correct. Bach's Well-tempered Clavier is a famous example.
On the other hand, if you want or need to study the scores as they were written, you want to get an "Urtext" edition, which preserves the original notation as much as possible. Collected editions are presented this way. In the case of the music of J.S. Bach, there are two collected editions, one completed in the 19th century, and the other in the latter half of the 20th. The 19th century edition (Bach-Gesellschaft edition) is now in the public domain and may be copied freely - in fact the Dover editions of Bach are simply reproductions of this edition. The 20th century edition (Neue Bach Ausgabe) is still very much under copyright.
Parent
Re:New editions of old music (Score:5, Interesting)
Providing parts and scores would be a useful service for our site to provide, but it's going to remain on the back burner for a while. Along the lines of another thread, it would be great if there were a standard, open format for sheet music. That would provide much more of an incentive for me to pack up my laptop and get some of those parts copied and available.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
What's funny is much of the sheet music I've aquired over the years has copyrights on it, even though much of it was written well over 200-300 years ago. I have piece by Vivaldi that actually says "Do not copy." I'm not sure how they can get away with such things...
They probably do have some sort of valid copyright on *their layout and presentation* of the music, so directly photocopying could be illegal; you're free to transcribe the notes yourself and then put the result into the public domain or whatever
Re:I have to say it (Score:5, Informative)
What's funny is much of the sheet music I've aquired over the years has copyrights on it, even though much of it was written well over 200-300 years ago. I have piece by Vivaldi that actually says "Do not copy." I'm not sure how they can get away with such things or think anyone will take it serious, but apparently publishers try anyways.
IIRC, while the sequence of notes is out of copyright the design and layout of the page on which they're printed isn't. So technically the publisher could well be in the right. IANAL, though.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
So if you read the sheet music, and transcribed the notes into music publishing software like Lilypond [lilypond.org], the copyright wouldn't apply anymore, right?
This is great news! (Score:4, Funny)
But where's all the Metallica?
Re:This is great news! (Score:5, Funny)
The members of the band don't know music notation.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
The members of the band don't know music notation.
"The members of the band don't know music".
There, fixed it for ya.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Fantastic (Score:5, Interesting)
I, for one, would like to thank and congratulate.
There is no reason why anybody should not be able to download and print copyright free works from 150 years ago, I do - and I am very grateful indeed for the opportunity. Quite apart from that this is a matter of principle - to fight the insidious attempts by labels and corporations to extend copyright and hence earn money even after the original artist is sadly no longer with us.
Now, if only my piano skills were more up to some of the music. Sigh.
Re:Fantastic (Score:4, Insightful)
Don't let that stop you, friend.
Even with a moderately difficult piece, if you work at a small section for, say, a half-hour a day, you'll sit down one day to play it and find that it sounds like music. I'm not saying that as an adult you can learn to play like Glenn Gould, but there's a lot of joy to be had getting a little better, a little at a time.
Parent
Re:Fantastic (Grammar Nazi) (Score:3, Interesting)
Where did this "for one" meme come from? Just say "I would like to thank you." See how easy that is? No commas, no extraneous words, it's brilliantly simple.
Personally I think people use the "for one" thing to look like they're bucking the crowd, since the traditional use would be something like: "most people in this city think that kicking puppies is good, but I, for one, think it's terrible!" You set yourself apart from the crowd by having some superior morality.
The problem is that in stories like this it
Doesn't seem to be completely open yet (Score:3, Interesting)
I tried to get the score for the Dies Irae for Mozart's Requiem in D Minor (K. 626). I got this instead:
Maybe they should have waited a couple more months when this type of message gets less common.
Lilypond (Score:4, Interesting)
Lilypond: http://lilypond.org/ [lilypond.org]
Mutopia (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Mutopia (Score:4, Informative)
Correct.
Mutopia's music is exclusively in LilyPond format, which basically means that not only can you print out the music, you can convert it to midi, transpose it to a different key (if you played a different instrument with a different range, for example) with not much difficulty, and even jam it up a bit.
IMSLP's music is not necessarily in LilyPond format, so if you wanted to edit it, you'd have to re-input it into a music notation program manually first. (Or possibly OCR it, but that would be pretty shoddy.)
Parent
PRS (Score:5, Interesting)
My house was a licensed premises in a former life, and yesterday I received a letter from the Performing Rights Society (UK), explaining that if music was played on the premises (whether recorded or performed live) then I was obliged to pay them for a license.
The letter strongly implies that ALL music is in scope. I just have to decide whether I have the energy and inclination to enter a debate with them about out of copyright works, or works with a permissive license.
This would all be for my own entertainment. Any suggestions?
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
They are notifying you because your house previously had a premises license. However as it's now domestic (I presume) then simply notifying them that it no longer has a premises license and that it is a domestic dwelling should be enough.
For private accomodation, the PRS can't do anything against you - it's only if it can be heard by the public, then thats when you need to pay them.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
They are notifying you because your house previously had a premises license. However as it's now domestic (I presume) then simply notifying them that it no longer has a premises license and that it is a domestic dwelling should be enough.
Well, obviously. Ignoring them is fine. The question is how much fun can be had by entering into a dialogue.
Re:PRS (Score:5, Interesting)
Then, publish the URL on Slashdot, so that we have another target for a good slashdotting.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
So you'd either have to play a record which is out of copyright (good luck finding such an old record and hooking up a suitable record player to a modern amp - few modern decks will play at 78RPM) or find 100 year old sheet of music and pay a performer to play that alone.
In other words, there are exceptions but they're sufficiently esoteric that it's vanishingly unlikely that anyone will take advantage of them.
Or music published by the author under a Creative Commons licence [creativecommons.org]. Or my own compositions played by myself. Or folks songs performed by myself without reference to sheet music.
Imagine a free library of all copyrighted work (Score:3, Interesting)
Imagine how awesome it would be for humankind if all copyrighted material could be accessible to all. All books, art, movies, music etc would be available with a click.
Here is how we do it:
Make a global library where everyone can donate a copyrighted work. The library then manages the copy, and make sure only one person can use it at a time. This should be managed like Netflix (which also btw distributes copyrighted material)
Example:
1. You rip a DVD to mp4 and upload it,
2. then place the original in a drawer marked "Archive copy of donated work".
3. The library registers that it has the license.
4. Now anyone could download the mp4 to have a copy on the disk, but needed to check out a license to actually view it.
If a second person donates the same work, no upload is necessary, so skip (1). Only (3) is required (i.e. licensecount++)
I am sure the with the efficiency of the net, the cost to build up this library to contain everything would be much smaller than the cost to operate current brick and mortar library.
Also, all the hard software parts is pretty much done/solved: MythTV, Bittorrent, Youtube, and the Netflix algorithm.
Who will take a stab at this?
Royalty-free music! (Score:5, Funny)
Yes, folks, all these FREE public domain HITS can be YOURS!
-Camptown Races!
-Amazing Grace!
-She'll be comin' round the mountain!
-Ain't we got fun!
-Anchors Aweigh!
-Hail, hail the gang's all here!
-I can dance with everyone but my wife!
-Mammy o'mine!
-Row, row, row!
-Swing low, sweet chariot!
Yes folks order now and for NO CHARGE you can sing these songs ANYWHERE! Saloons! Public squares! The telegraph office!
And if you order NOW we'll include at no extra charge:
-The whiffenpoof song!
-Stop yer ticklin', jock!
-Nobody knows de trouble I've seen!
-It's delightful to be married!
-I love my wife, but oh you kid!
-Everybody works but father!
Don't wait! Call now! DO IT!
[all real songs]
[not a troll]
-b
Re:Royalty-free music! (Score:4, Interesting)
It's interesting that you should pick on "Camptown Races", by Stephen Foster. Foster was pretty much the first person to attempt to make a living as a writer of popular songs. It was a tough slog, mainly due to the fact that his work was widely "pirated" by music publishers. It is in part because of his efforts in the early days that songwriters today actually can make a living writing music.
BTW -- if you want an intelligent, well-researched, non-corny, sensitive, and exquisitely recorded selection of Stephen Foster works, go here: http://www.joeweed.com/ and look for "Swanee - The Music of Stephen Foster". (Disclaimer: yes, Joe is a friend of mine. My opinion of his work wouldn't change if he wasn't -- just google for some reviews.)
Parent
Re:So (Score:5, Informative)
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
you don't, but this gives you the source with which you can make an mp3 and upload it for the rest of us...