[cc-community] What does NC means?

drew Roberts zotz at 100jamz.com
Sun Sep 16 17:42:36 EDT 2007


On Sunday 16 September 2007 04:07 pm, Peter Brink wrote:
> drew Roberts skrev:
> > On Sunday 16 September 2007 06:13 am, Peter Brink wrote:
> >> jonathon skrev:
> >>> What happens when:
> >>>
> >>> # somebody wants to distribute the hymnal as a resource for a Bible
> >>> study program:
> >>> * Ogg file;
> >>> * mp3 file;
> >>> * midi file;
> >>> * Shape note music PDF/PNG;
> >>> * Braille Music notation PDF and/or DDF. (DDF is a common Braille file
> >>> format.) * Text file/HTMl/whatever that contains the lyrics;
> >>> * Text file/HTMl/whatever that contains the guitar chords;
> >>>
> >>> # Creates an audio CD for the choir to listen to, to learn the words
> >>> and music?
> >>>
> >>> Both of those involve the creation of "derivative works",even if the
> >>> lyrics and melody haven't changed.
> >>
> >> Neither of your examples involves the creation of a derivative work.
> >> Producing a Braille Music notation or an html version of the work is the
> >> same as making a copy of the work - which is permitted. Recording a
> >> performance of the work and saving it as a mp3 file is not a derivative
> >> work and it is allowed under all CC-licenses.
> >
> > Peter,
> >
> > surely this one:
> >
> > * Text file/HTMl/whatever that contains the guitar chords;
> >
> > may indeed go to a derivative as a new arrangement if the original was
> > arranged for, say, four part vocal only.
>
> An arrangement is, if it's at all copyrightable, a independent work. A
> piece of music is thus really three works. The lyric, the music (the
> notation) and the arrangement. But many (probably most) arrangements are
> so trivial (in sense that they are very easy to independently
> double-create) that they fail to qualify for copyright protection.

I think I am going to need more of an explanation in order to understhand 
this. Would you be so kind as to try?

> Making minor changes (such as editing) to a work does not make the new
> version a derivative work - the changes need to be original.
>
> > And in the US, you get a (P) copyright on a sound recording. So you get a
> > new copyright but it is not considered a derivative? (I am ignorant
> > here.)
>
> The sound recording is (in Europe at least) a separate work. You do need
> permission to do the recording from the copyright holder of the work
> being recorded. Such a permission is given in the CC licenses.

I think in the US you can get permission, or, if the work is already 
published/recorded? you can avail yourself of a compulsory license in place 
of permission from the copyright holder.

So, are you saying that the sound recording, while it can get a copyright on 
its own, is not considered a derivative work of the original? It somehow 
stands alone?
>
> /Peter Brink

all the best,

drew


More information about the cc-community mailing list