IMSLP Forums

http://imslp.org/wiki/IMSLP:Verifying_copyright_status says that the 'content of the scores' on http://www.cdsheetmusic.com/ CDs are public domain. Does that mean that any file that comes from a 'CD sheet music' CD and has all trademarks removed will be allowed onto IMSLP? I can't find any (original) publisher info on many CD sheet music pdfs.

No, actually. The CDSM sets are for sale and only for sale in the U.S., meaning their public domain status has only been verified for that country. There are frequently files present that are not PD in Canada, and since this is where the site is hosted, every file uploaded must at least be public domain here to be completely legal.

Thanks for the info.
I now notice that http://www.cdsheetmusic.com/about.cfm says that the editions used are "out of copyright (that is, in the public domain) in the United States." However, http://www.cdsheetmusic.com/store.cfm says that CD sheet music is "distributed to dealers in the U.S., Canada, Japan, and Australia/Zealand."

They may now offer sets that are PD in Canada, but for the most part, one must be careful when submitting CDSM files to IMSLP. For example, the French piano works collection has sheet music by Poulenc and Ibert published before 1923, however they won't enter the public domain in Canada until 2014 and 2013, respectively.

The vast majority of the underlying works that make up the CDSM collections are public domain in most countries. However, because CDSM is based in the USA, there are a number of cases (like pre-1923 publications of compsers such as Bartok, Schoenberg and Richard Strauss), where items are still under copyright in the EU, and even a couple (like pre-1923 issues of Stravinsky, Ibert, and Milhaud), where they are not free in Canada either.

As you mentioned, CDSM does not identify the original publisher or other edition info for the items they've scanned. This is probably at least partially die to their having scanned reprints from Dover and Kalmus, where such information is normally omitted.

I now have the Orchestra Musician's CD-ROM Library Violin Parts of Volumes 1 and 7. I quote from the inside cover:

The PDF files on this CD-ROM are copyrighted and may be printed by the licensee for his/her personal use, but not otherwise copied or reproduced or e-mailed.

This is copyfraud, right? They're PD reprints (stated so on the site), so the PDFs can't be copyright! And even if they were, once I print the pdfs, they are just reprints of PD works, and it doesn't matter where I got them, so they can be uploaded to IMSLP.

Please correct me if there's a subtlety I'm missing, but if not, I'll assume uploading is okay.

That is very copyfraud.

I just want to extremely careful about uploading things when people tell me I "will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law." What should I use for editor, scanner, and publisher information?

Is there a way to understand which edition they scanned?
In some situation I have seen Carolus recognizing some items like Peters edition.(experience ? luck? ).
I think that going to library to compare editions should be a huge work....(and you have to be lucky to find the same you have...)....

Greetings

Carmar

A lot of it is very much experience in dealing with all sorts of scores and parts. Certain publishers have a very recognizable style: Ricordi, Peters, Durand, Muzgiz, UE are all fairly easy to spot in certain periods - especially the period from around 1880-1940.

French engravers are fairly easy to recognize, as are certain English ones. It can get tricky when a French publisher like Hamelle sent a work to Röder in Leipzig for engraving, though (as they did with a number of Cesar Franck works). Items done at Röder's music huge engraving and printing factory in Leipzig are all fairly consistent in appearance, too. Trouble is, Röder produced scores and parts for hundreds of publishers from Russia (Belaieff) to the United States (Arthur P. Schmidt, for example).

We have some fairly nice publisher pages in the "Historical Publication Info" section, complete with samples of the typical engraving style in a few cases. This will improve over time as more things are added, plate number listings are filled out, etc.

One annoying feature of reprints -- besides the removal of original title page, publisher name, plate nos, etc. -- is the replacement of the original typefaces (if not also language) of headings (movement title, composer name, etc. at the top.)

For instance, the Kalmus (I think) reprint of collected piano works by Dargomyzhsky replaces all the original titles with Arial-style English headings.

Amen to what Lyle said. Some of the Kalmus reprints use really ugly typefaces to replace the originals. They're normally quite good at removing the censor's line from Russian scores of the Czarist era, which can make determination of which printing they reprinted a real challenge.

Of course no one could afford to exactly reprint the scores issued by Belaieff with those amazing chromolithograph title pages that were issued in the 1880s and 1890s. Belaieff must have been spending money like an absolute maniac. They're works of art in their own right, though.

If I'm not mistaken, Dover also replaces the original typeface of headings of works with English translation, although to me the font looks good.

Dover also frequently (but not always) cites the scores they have reprinted in the frontmatter section. Their typographical additions are generally done tastefully as well. In all fairness, Kalmus (the real Kalmus, not the Warner/Alfred imprint) has greatly improved in both printing quality and typographical changes in the last 25 years or so.

Carolus wrote:Dover also frequently (but not always) cites the scores they have reprinted in the frontmatter section.

That's true. Sometimes they just say that the edition is a reprint of "an early authoritative edition". And even if they cite the original publisher, they sometimes don't state the original year of publication by that particular publisher. They just simply put "N. D.".