IMSLP Forums

On the Medtner page, seemingly random public domain works are blocked with a 'TB'. All the works, blocked or not, are contributed by the same person. I am hoping that someone would know why? And considering there are 1500 Blocked works with a TB, this is most likely a problem in many other places. The official message states that the works will most likely not be unblocked for several years, yet, at least on the Medtner page case, this makes no sense what so ever, given that most of the same contributors works are not blocked.

Thanks for any help!

I agree that the [TB] blocking is quite inconsistent. For example, compare the following two pieces, which are apparently from the same publisher from around the same time:
http://imslp.org/wiki/2_Elegies,_Op.59_ ... Karlovich) (Blocked)
http://imslp.org/wiki/Etude_(Medtner,_N ... Karlovich) (Not blocked)

Cheers,
Reinhold

Thanks for raising this as an issue. The [TB] block specifically targets the US portion of the copyright tags, so it is worth teasing this issue out a little.

I assume both of you know about:
http://imslp.org/wiki/Public_domain#Russia_.2F_USSR
and:
http://imslp.org/wiki/Public_domain#U.S ... 3_and_1978

I would surmise from the former paragraph that Medtner, having died in 1951, should have been in the public domain in the USSR at the time the US copyright restoration went into effect. The complete works edition from Muzgiz is probably completely PD, although I wouldn't rule out there being some exceptions from his œuvre: there could conceivably be editorial completions of incomplete works, or lyricists/translators of any vocal works who lived beyond the cut-off date c.1953; also note the general editor Goedicke lived to 1957, so any copyright pertaining to his editorial contributions would have lapsed only in respect of Canada. Thus the Muzgiz score of the Op.59 Elegies probably ought to have the same copyright tag as the remainder of the Muzgiz complete works edition.

The Zimmerman score of the Elegies published in [the former West] Germany in 1953 is correctly marked with a US copyright expiration of 2049, so my assumption is that the copyright tagger of the Muzgiz score applied the same tag, assuming the same copyright issue to have held: probably just a simple mistake, rather than malicious inconsistency.

If there are any other of the Muzgiz scores tagged incorrectly, please PM me and I'll check them. I am not as au fait with the intricacies of US copyright as certain others of the Copyright Review team, so I'm only marking these US tags as "checked", rather than "verified"; however, that is sufficient to remove the TB block and allow the scores to be downloaded.

Regards, Philip

There is going to be a certain amount of irregularity with Medtner, since a given work's US status is highly dependent upon where the piece was first published and when. Generally, if the piece was first published by Zimmermann (in Germany) 1923 or later, it's a fairly safe bet that it is still protected in the USA. On the other hand, if a given title was first issued in the USSR as part of the complete works - there's at least a 50-50 chance that it's PD. For example, if there is a reprint currently available from Dover, Kalmus-Alfred, or Masters, you can be 99% certain that it is free in the USA. Muzyka routinely published works without any copyright notice well into the 1980s, which automatically injected them into the USA public domain upon publication. Zimmermann, by contrast, was nearly always meticulous about having the notice there in the right place.

Even though Medtner was actually still under copyright in Russia from 1996-1998 (the window for filing the NIEs for restoration in the USA), I didn't see any of his works in the NIE list last time I checked. As for the urtext editions of things first issued before 1923, we're treating them very much like all Muzyka urtext editions. There were a few instances where the Muzyka edition was all we have, but the work in question was actually first published by Zimmermann. These works would still be protected in the USA. Of course, if more evidence surfaces - like an NIE filing, we'll naturally have to re-assess our tagging.

Hi Carolus,

I was just about to say I had noticed you'd unblocked the 1st piano concerto when I looked at the year in which the tag was applied

Thanks for that extra information - have I got this straight? The works issued by Muzgiz that would have fallen into the PD in the 1990s, actually haven't because of the status of the post-1923 publications by Zimmermann.

I'm probably being a bit thick, but if "Medtner was actually still under copyright in Russia from 1996–1998", does this mean that while in theory the copyright has (by now) expired for Russian composers who died in 1952 or earlier, in practice some of them who may have been in copyright during that period are still under copyright now? How far does this ambiguity extend? (Medtner died in 1951, so that's at least a couple of years earlier than 1953.)

Thanks, Philip

EDIT: Yes, I am being a bit thick. The Russian copyright term was 50 years pma until 2004 when it was extended by 20 years. So the ambiguity in the case of Medtner could potentially apply to any Russian composer who died between 1946 and 1953 and whose post-1923 works were published and diligently filed for copyright renewal in the West?

Since Medtner was under copyright in Russia until 2002, someone could have filed for an NIE (Notice of Intent to Enforce) with the US Copyright Office in the 1996-1998 window, thus "restoring" the work to copyright in the USA. Zimmermann was not perfect about observing the requirements of the US law in effect from 1909-1977, which resulted in several post-1923 publications being free in the USA. You're correct, any Russian composer who died after 1946 could be subject to restoration. If a composer ended up in the west, like Medtner, his Russian status effects only those works first published in the USSR after 1922. It gets even more complicated if Medtner was "restored to personhood" in Russia after being denounced by the Soviet regime. Such folks were granted extra years - somewhat like the French situation for those involved in the world wars.

The fact that Muzgiz issued the works first published by Zimmermann after the fact would not change their status in the USA, since the Zimmermann claim governed the work's status in the USA - the USSR issue being technically illegal to import.

Thank you both for the replies!

There are a couple things I don't understand still:

1)Carolus brought up the fact that since some of the works were published by zimmerman then they are copyright in the US. The scores I was referring to are the ones published by Muzgiz, not Zimmerman. Why is the copyright of the Muzgiz edition dependent on the copyright of the zimmerman edition?

2)In any case, the works are public domain in canada where the server is hosted. Has IMSLP decided to follow american copyright law or something? I thought that if it was public domain in canada it could be available for download, with the responsiblity of following the laws on the shoulders of the downloader.

Thanks so much!

Hi NKMedtner,

To answer your questions:

1) Absolutely. If Zimmermann was the first to issue a work, the status of that issue determines the USA status regardless of the Muzgiz issue, which was technically illegal to import into the US. It was probably likewise illegal in Western Europe, though I don't know that for certain.

2) Unfortunately, we have to (unofficially) observe USA copyright law for the time being due to the fact that so much of our traffic comes from there. This could change in a few years, as our options for excellent legal representation improve.