Posted: Sat Jan 12, 2008 2:45 am
You're going to get a lot of hate mails from Austrians
Forums for the International Music Score Library Project (IMSLP)
https://forums.imslp.eu/
Source: http://www.historycooperative.org/cgi-b ... r_175.htmlPostwar Austria, as the old joke has it, managed to make most of the world believe that Ludwig van Beethoven was an Austrian and Adolf Hitler a German.
Mahler, was born in the (then) Austrian Empire. Haydn was born in an Austrian Village. Schoenberg was born in Vienna. Schubert, also in Vienna. Webern, again, Vienna. Berg was also in Vienna. Austria still has a few famous composers.nor anyone of the famous classical componists of Vienna were originally Austrian.
At least they will be sincere...Vivaldi wrote:You're going to get a lot of hate mails from Austrians
Least of all for themselves, as is demonstrated by their increasingly risible attempts to claim they weren't the cause of the (temporary) demise of IMSLP. The tale posted by Herr Jonathan Irons seems intended to make it seem as if UE is, somehow, the victim - but does anyone really believe such disingenuous poppycock?SaschaPascal wrote:
The UE don't do a good job to anybody, it seems to me:
They'll probably try to get it extended again.SaschaPascal wrote: I don't say anything about the issue, that we have the problem, that in the EU and the USA copyright lasted as long as 70 years after the death of the person. It's questionable, why it's so long, the 50 years, also half a century, of Canada are in my eyes enough time for the componist and his childs and grandchilds to get enough money out. (And, as a question, what will they do in 20 years, when the first highsellers like Buddy Holly and Ritchie Valens get PD?)
It's just silly to think like that. Many of the scores are available at any decent music library, where one can copy out the scores even if one is not allowed to photocopy them because the originals are too fragile, or because the scores are actually original autograph scores. What IMSLP did was to save the trouble of having to visit a music library, which made sheet music more accessible to people with mobility difficulties.SaschaPascal wrote:
The problem with the UE is one thing in my opinion: this stupid elite thinking, many "educated people" in Europe and America have. From my studying I know many people, who thinks, that they are something better, because they are educated and have the ability to get for example scores of Mozart. And the people, who are interested in classical music, but don't have the money to buy the highpriced scores, are "stupid and non-elite".
But not only does Herr Jonathan Irons not believe that the concept is good, he seems unable to understsnd that sponsoring the IMSLP might be the best wsy out of the hole into which UE has dug itself. He (and his employers) seem to think of music solely as a means to make money. perhaps because money is all they really like.SaschaPascal wrote: Classical music, when it's PD in law, should be available via internet. The internet is for communication and information, not for commercials and sells of companies. When the UE would be a company who really wanted the "E-music" getting a greater popularity, they would not write C+D-letters, but would ask: "Well, the idea is good, but there are problems with non-PD-music on your site. We would help you to solve this problem by supporting you and sponsoring you. Is that an idea for you?"
Would UE be willing to pay royalties to Tim Berners-Lee (who invented the WWW) and, if not, why not?SaschaPascal wrote: I don't say anything about the capitalism right now. I'm not non-capitalism, I'm only angry about the stupidity, the companies and their CEOs are showing: because of their economical education, which says, that the only important thing in the world is making as much money as possible, they do everything again PD and free areas in the world, where they are able to.
And so they lose the chance to meet one of the goals of the internet: with the internet you can bring "meritorical things" (a thing, they mostly don't know, meritical means, that there things like classic music or books are not produced and published as much as they should, mostly because of economical reasons, printing classical scores in high numbers would not make much money in the bilance) much cheaper, faster and better to the people, so that the range of the persons, who gets interested in things like good books, classical music, documentations and so on would increase.
How much classical (and more modern) music is available on-line from the Library of Congress?SaschaPascal wrote: And in the end, they are biting in their one tail, because with shutting down pages like the IMSLP (I know, feldmahler took it offline itself, but only with the intention of the UE) the range of people will not increase. And perhabs, because of making the people, who already known the IMSLP, angry, the UE will probably decrease the number of customers they have.
Well, in the time of the barock a copyright would have been quite useless, because you couldn't copy a music played by Bach himself with another musician, every musician have it's own style. And without the right to copy the notes the componists of the past hadn't been known for a great audience, you couldn't travel from Munich to Hamburg only to listen to a musical, and the Lords wanted to listen to the Opera in their own theatre.Most baroque music was never actually copyrighted. These days, the convention is that the copyright of a work belongs to the person who created it unless assigned elsewhere, but it was no always so. When Walsh published Handel's Opus 6 Concerti grossi in 1740, the publisher and the author had to obtain (and pay for) "a privilege of copyright" to protect that work.
Well, libraries are not like the IMSLP or similar internet projects:It's just silly to think like that. Many of the scores are available at any decent music library, where one can copy out the scores even if one is not allowed to photocopy them because the originals are too fragile, or because the scores are actually original autograph scores. What IMSLP did was to save the trouble of having to visit a music library, which made sheet music more accessible to people with mobility difficulties.
What UE did was, in that respect, not far removed from kicking away a cripple's crutches or letting down the tires of a paraplegic's wheelchair.
Well, you mean, they are only business men, not artists?
But not only does Herr Jonathan Irons not believe that the concept is good, he seems unable to understsnd that sponsoring the IMSLP might be the best wsy out of the hole into which UE has dug itself. He (and his employers) seem to think of music solely as a means to make money. perhaps because money is all they really like.
Indeed, I received a courteous and prompt reply from Mr Irons when I emailed him about my concerns. I quote it here in full, as it seems that UE is being demonised rather hastily. When I replied, thanking him for taking the time to reply, he told me that everyone who has emailed UE has been replied to. Both this and the tone of his email strike me as far from the unreasonable stance that has been alleged in some quarters.monteverdi wrote:Are you all aware that there is a statement about the IMSLP case on UE's website? It's quite interesting to read, I think.
Maybe we all should send our opinion in written form to UE as they don't seem to take it serious what is obvious here in these forums.
You find it there:
http://www.uemusic.at/truman/en_templat ... f_id=14921
(The German title says: »The Rise and Fall of IMSLP«)