IMSLP Forums

Hi, I found this scores:

Mozart, Wolfgang Amadeus
Eine kleine Nachtmusik - Serenade - Fuer Klavier zu 2 Haenden (Piano 2 Hands)
Bearbeitung von Otto Singer (Arrangement by Otto Singer)
C.F.Peters - Leipzig
Edition Number: 3957
Plate Number: 10629

The dates I found so far:

Mozart (1756-1791)
Singer, Otto (1863–1931)
Excerpt from the list of Edition Peters with the preceding and successional Edition Number and Plate Number:
(found here: http://imslp.org/wiki/Edition_Peters/Edition_Numbers)
Edition Number: 3905, Plate Number: 10447, Year: 1925, Brahms, Clarinet Quintet, Op.115
Edition Number: 4320, Plate Number: 10800, Year: 1930, Borodin, Petite Suite

some math:

1931 + 75 = 2006 < 2010 - no copyright for Mr Singer
1930 + 95 = 2025 > 2010 - the pulisher still has the copyright

am I right, or does the 95 years for companies not hold up?

thanks for letting me know

Hi Induktion,

the fly in the ointment is that bizarre 95 year copyright term from the date of publication in the US, which is also subject to the copyright having been successfully claimed and renewed. If for some reason the correct copyright notice wasn’t affixed to the score, or the work wasn’t registered and renewed with the US copyright notice, then the work will have fallen into the public domain.

The three jurisdictions we keep track of are Canada, the US and the European Union – non-PD works in Canada must not be uploaded without permission; non-PD works in US will be blocked from download without permission obtained from the copyright holder.

We don’t track copyrights for other regimes (e.g. Mexico) which have extended copyright terms to the positively absurd, 100 years post mortem auctoris: for a recently deceased composer such as György Ligeti, this means his works may not be freely copied in Mexico until several years into the 22nd century!

Regards, PML

Hi pml,

thanks for the quick reply. it is probably german copyright, because Leipzig is a town in eastern germany.
but there is no additional copyright notice on the scores. even in the online catalogue is none:
https://www.edition-peters.de/cms/deuts ... d=EP3957&=

there are some additional information, which i can't make sense of:

Lizenz Nr.: 415-330/530/57 (licence)
Stich: C.G. Roeder, Leizpig (engraving)
Druck: VEB Messe- und Musikaliendruck, Leipzig III/18/157 (print)

it seems to me, that this is a reprint of the original scores which were engraved around 1930. The VEB is an east-german company from 1955 - ... i can not find a date when they closed but probably around 1989, after the wall came down

does copyright restarts with a reprint, or not?

thanks

As PML mentioned, the only possible problem here is the status of this work in the USA. Does the item bear the requisite notice for USA status? The required notice for USA status must appear on the title page or the first music page. The notice must contain three elements: 1) The word "Copyright", or the abbreviation "Copr.", or the symbol "©"; 2) the year of first publication (of Singer's arrangement); 3) the name of the copyright claimant (C.F. Peters, most likely). If there is no copyright notice present, the work is public domain in the USA. As it is also public domain in the country of origin (Germany), the work cannot be restored to copyright now. Singer's arrangement was possibly under copyright in Germany back in 1996, when the GATT/TRIPS restoration provisions went into effect. there is a (very slim) possibility the work was restored in the two-year window (1996-1998). Publishing a work without a copyright notice (or with a defective notice) injected the work into the US public domain the minute it was offered for sale in the USA.

If the notice is there, the next step is to look for a reprint version of the identical score (often Kalmus, sometimes by International or another American publisher). The reason for this is that Peters is the absolute worst publisher of all for putting notices on later printings of items originally issued without a copyright notice. Kalmus and other reprint houses in the USA were quick to reprint things, so a reprint of this score is proof that the original issue from Peters was without a notice. (Before 1950, Peters apparently made sure that notices were present only on the works of the composers then living or still under copyright in Germany. Arrangements and editions were ferquently issued without a notice in that era. After 1950, Peters, inserted notices upon the editions and arrangements when reprinted. Such "scarecrow" notices are sometimes total, absurd fantasies - like their placement of a 1950 notice on an item originally published in 1915.) Reprinting an older score does not qualify for a new copyright term - even in Germany.