Ulisse Matthey

[adrian_m]

Hi everyone,

today I submitted 4 works of the Italian composer and Organist Ulisse Matthey (1876-1947), all of them were edited by his former student Pietro Ferrari (1908-1970) and published between 1959 and 1965. I don't understand why all submitted files are labeled "non-pd us" and "non-pd eu": Matthey died 75 years ago and these first editions are at least 55 years old. What's the problem?

Adriano

[Sallen112]

Its because of Pietro Ferrari's additions puts the edition under copyright in the USA and the EU and he died less than 70 years ago.

[adrian_m]

Its because of Pietro Ferrari's additions puts the edition under copyright in the USA and the EU and he died less than 70 years ago.

So without the first page there shouldn't be any issue, right?

[Sallen112]

I really wouldn't worry about those notifications (its to let people know based on where you are where it is under copyright but the edition is PD-Canada) and plus no your completely wrong about "removing" the first page to make it PD, the WHOLE edition is under copyright of all pages within the file.

[adrian_m]

I really wouldn't worry about those notifications (its to let people know based on where you are where it is under copyright but the edition is PD-Canada) and plus no your completely wrong about "removing" the first page to make it PD, the WHOLE edition is under copyright of all pages within the file.

Sorry, I don't get it. In my case, the only addition made by Ferrari is the introductory text on the first page. EU provides copyright protection for max 30 years in the case of critical editions, but I don't find anything about normal editions, could you help me?

In my humble opinion Ferrari's contribution remains way below the threshold of originality and anyway isn't protected by actual copyright legislation.

[Sallen112]

I really wouldn't worry about those notifications (its to let people know based on where you are where it is under copyright but the edition is PD-Canada) and plus no your completely wrong about "removing" the first page to make it PD, the WHOLE edition is under copyright of all pages within the file.

Sorry, I don't get it. In my case, the only addition made by Ferrari is the introductory text on the first page. EU provides copyright protection for max 30 years in the case of critical editions, but I don't find anything about normal editions, could you help me?

In my humble opinion Ferrari's contribution remains way below the threshold of originality and anyway isn't protected by actual copyright legislation.

No once again, if you see the "Revisione di Pietro Ferrari" which means "Revised by Pietro Ferrari", it was determined that his additions he made to the edition are significant enough for copyright protection which overwrites Matthey's copyright in this edition only and extends it until 2041 in the EU when the copyright will expire. And no its not a critical edition then. If the additions he made to the score were removed (and that introductory text), then the copyright would be of Matthey's copyright.

[adrian_m]

Thank you, now I get your point. Actually "revisione" is - in my understanding as native speaker and musicologist - a synonym for "a cura di" and it means usually that the "revisore" added fingering and eventually corrected wrong notes. But in this case we'll never know exactly, because this is the first and only existing edition and the original manuscripts are unavailable.

[Sallen112]

Its possible that the preface on the title page "might" be the only thing that is protected, but because his name is included and yes your correct about the inclusion of the addition of fingerings in the edition, this places it firmly under copyright with how heavy the additions are in the edition.

Wrong notes are not usually copyrightable but fingerings are.

[adrian_m]

is there any official guideline or legislation about this particular case (aka editor's copyright for a normal - not critical - edition)?

I've just checked here and there's nothing about it.
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content ... 1e354-12-1

And actually according to IMSLP own Guideline are fingerings insignificant and not copyrightable.

Insignificant editorial contributions have no copyright in themselves. Significant ones often do. The editor's contribution to the work must be of a significant and original nature, meeting a "threshold of originality," to qualify for copyright protection. Some examples:

Most Significant: Transcriptions, orchestrations, arrangements, creative realizations of continuo or figured bass parts.
Less Significant: Articulations, slurs, dynamic and tempo markings, routine chordal realizations of figured basses.
Insignificant: Adding original (new) fingerings, transposition, error correction, translation of common expressions and instrument names.
Insignificant: Adding fingerings, articulations, slurs, dynamic and tempo markings from other public domain sources.

[Sallen112]

The thing is unless we have access to his manuscripts, there is no way we'll know what got changed exactly.

[adrian_m]

Anyway we can exclude for sure all of the most significant editorial contributions, since it's not a transcription, nor an orchestration, nor an arrangement.

About the less significant ones I shall doubt, because Ferrari self speaks about Matthey's recognizable "personal style" (see title page of "Alla Madonna di Loreto"), therefore I assume he didn't commit any noticeable change.

And last but not least, this may be a critical edition, since "bases itself wherever possible on the very finest and most accurate sources" (quote by Philip Gossett) and Pietro Ferrari himself declared to have worked on the original manuscripts.

[ClarkHill]

I understand your confusion about the "non-pd us" and "non-pd eu" markings on the Ulysses Mattei files submitted. It indicates that the files are not in the public domain in the U.S. and the European Union, respectively. Although Ulisse Mattei died 75 years ago and his works published over 55 years ago should normally be in the public domain, several factors should be considered. One is changes in copyright law that may have affected copyright extensions. If the files are labeled "non-pd," this may mean that there may be legal or copyright reasons that cause the works in question to remain copyrighted. The works may have been republished or edited in later years, which may affect their copyright status.

[ClarkHill]

I thought you wouldn't approve the answer)