[cc-community] What does NC means?

Peter Brink peter.brink at brinkdata.se
Mon Sep 17 00:31:45 EDT 2007


drew Roberts skrev:
> 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:
[snip]
>>>
>>> * 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 understand 
> this. Would you be so kind as to try?
> 

Let's say that a author writes a poem then that this is a work. Then a 
composer creates a music score so that one can sing the poem, this is a 
new independent work. Later a musician comes along and makes a nice 
arrangement of the music score, the arrangement as such can also be a 
copyrightable work. It's independent from the music score. It's used to 
perform the music score which in turn is used to perform the poem.

The performing artist gets a independent performance neighbouring right 
(which is not a work) if the set of works are publicly performed. The 
producer gets an independent recording neighbouring right (which is not 
a work) if the set of works are recorded. In both these cases the three 
copyright holders need to be asked permission in order to perform or 
copy the works.

In Europe a product that can easily be independently double created 
(such as most source code) is not considered original enough for it to 
qualify for copyright protection.

> 
> 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?

Please remember that the rules of copyright law are _not_ the same 
across the globe. The US implementation of the principles of the Berne 
convention and other treaties does not constitute a global norm.

In Europe the producer of a sound recording receives an independent 
neighbouring right to any recording he does. There is no requirement of 
originality. This is thus _not_ a copyright (since a copyrightable work 
needs to be original). The duration of the right is 50 years counting 
from the publication date. The producer needs to secure a permission to 
make the recording from the copyright holder of the work being recorded.

/Peter Brink


More information about the cc-community mailing list