[cc-community] What does NC means?
drew Roberts
zotz at 100jamz.com
Mon Sep 17 08:52:13 EDT 2007
On Monday 17 September 2007 12:31 am, Peter Brink wrote:
> 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.
OK, independent, so does the composer need permission from the author to make
this work? If no, I can see how the word independent properly applies. If
yes, then this must be some special legal meaning for the word independent
that does not line up too closely with everyday usage.
> 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.
How in the world is this independent? That seems totally nonsensical in the
ordinary usage of the word. Can you explain how it comes to be an independent
work?
> It's used to
> perform the music score which in turn is used to perform the poem.
Fine.
>
> The performing artist gets a independent performance neighbouring right
> (which is not a work) if the set of works are publicly performed.
Performed? zEven if it is not fixed? And in the US, doesn't this work get a
(P) when fixed?
> The
> producer gets an independent recording neighbouring right (which is not
> a work) if the set of works are recorded.
See above about the (P) in the US. Is it the way I think in the US? (Can
anyone make this clear for the ignorant amoung us?)
> 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 the GPL would be useless for those works? Any ideas as to the percentage of
GPL products on a place like sourceforge that would actually have no
copyright in Europe? (Wild guessing appreciated in the absence of good data
on this one as a start.)
>
> > 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.
This I know.
> The US implementation of the principles of the Berne
> convention and other treaties does not constitute a global norm.
This too I know.
For the record. I am not in the US, nor from there, nor a citizen of there.
>
> In Europe the producer of a sound recording receives an independent
> neighbouring right to any recording he does.
So, what does this right allow him to do / not do?
> 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.
So, on a BY-SA work, how would this right be handled? Presumably??? this right
would not have to be BY-SA since there is no copyright??? Or did I miss some
esoteric language that I did not get the import of in my reading of the
license?
>
> /Peter Brink
all the best, and thanks for your time,
drew
More information about the cc-community
mailing list