Schumann - Album für die Jugend

Specific copyright information. If you're not sure if you can upload your score, ask it here first

Moderators: kcleung, Copyright Reviewers

Post Reply
worov
forum adept
Posts: 75
Joined: Thu May 28, 2009 8:45 am
notabot: 42
notabot2: Human

Schumann - Album für die Jugend

Post by worov »

Hi, everybody !

I have lately found an edition of Schumann's Album für die Jugend (opus 68), but I don't if this edition is public domain. I don't know which publisher or editor it is. Could anyone help ? I have uploaded the file on mediafire. Here's the link :

http://www.mediafire.com/?bgdrn8ufiq70utr

Thanks in advance.
daphnis
Copyright Reviewer
Posts: 1633
Joined: Thu May 17, 2007 7:15 pm
notabot: 42
notabot2: Human

Re: Schumann - Album für die Jugend

Post by daphnis »

I'm not sure about specific publication details, but it appears that it is an old German engraving pre 1900 which is probably public domain.
Choralia
Site Admin
Posts: 762
Joined: Fri Aug 28, 2009 9:08 pm
notabot: 42
notabot2: Human

Re: Schumann - Album für die Jugend

Post by Choralia »

Probably extracted from (info from the Italian library system):

Robert Schumann's werke : band I : fur pianoforte solo / revidiert von Alfred Dorffel mit fingersatz versehen von R. Schmidt. Leipzig : Peters, 1890. Plate number 7000.

The whole volume includes 186 pages, and this work is supposed to range from page 4 to page 59, which quite well matches the number of pages of the pdf file provided.

Alfred Dorffel died in 1905, while I've found no information about Richard Schmidt, however, assuming he was an adult in 1890, it's VERY unlikely that this work can be still copyrighted in Canada.

Max
KGill
Copyright Reviewer
Posts: 1295
Joined: Thu Apr 09, 2009 10:16 pm
notabot: 42
notabot2: Human

Re: Schumann - Album für die Jugend

Post by KGill »

Choralia wrote:while I've found no information about Richard Schmidt, however, assuming he was an adult in 1890, it's VERY unlikely that this work can be still copyrighted in Canada.
BNF gives his dates as '18..-18..?', which suggests that they seriously doubt that he lived much past 1900. One of the publications they list is dated as 'ca.1879'. I think we're pretty safe here.
Post Reply