LawMeme LawMeme Yale Law School  
LawMeme
Search LawMeme [ Advanced Search ]
 
 
 
 
Copyright in a 300-Year Old Work?
Posted by James Grimmelmann on Saturday, July 17 @ 14:47:52 EDT Copyright
How do you claim copyright in a piece of music composed in the early 18th century? Easy, if you're musicologist Lionel Sawkins: you claim copyright in your arrangement of a the piece. Sawkins took incomplete manuscripts and edited them into shape: reconstructing his best guesses at missing viola parts and reconciling differences in different versions of the piece. And now he's suing a recording company that has released CDs based on performances of his arrangements for copyright infringement.

Like many other disputes in copyright policy, this is unfortunately one of those places where the cases at each end of the spectrum are compellingly easy. "Twinkle Twinkle Little Star" may be a public domain tune, but there's no good reason why a set of variations on the tune (like Mozart's ) shouldn't be copyrightable. On the other hand, I shouldn't be able to get a copyright in Beethoven's Fifrth by having the opening phrase played by the brass, rather than by the strings. You have to draw the line somewhere, and that somewhere will involve difficult judgment calls.

As the article points out, this case is even messier because Sawkins's reconstruction bears a close resemblance to an earlier reconstruction from the 1960s. Sawkins claims that the harmony "he harmony severely restricted his options, as they had Paillard's." But this argument cuts against Sawkins, because to the extent that the harmony dictates a result, it means that Sawkins isn't adding any creativity of his own. And if the arrangement doesn't reflect his creativity, he shouldn't get a copyright at all.

According to the article, the dispute involved a CD that sold 3,000 copies, generated £500,000 in legal fees, and "could easily have been avoided." That's copyright for you.

(Link thanks to boingboing.)

 
Related Links
· More about Copyright
· News by James Grimmelmann


Most read story about Copyright:
Top Ten New Copyright Crimes

Options

 Printer Friendly Page  Printer Friendly Page

 Send to a Friend  Send to a Friend

Threshold
  
The comments are owned by the poster. We aren't responsible for their content.

Re: Copyright in a 300-Year Old Work? (Score: 0)
by Anonymous on Tuesday, July 20 @ 11:56:22 EDT
"You have to draw the line somewhere, and that somewhere will involve difficult judgment calls."

If drawing a line is a judgement call then it is necessarily subjective and thus essentially arbitary. the whole problem with copyright law is that it presumes to be able to make clear distinctions between things that live on a continuum. IP law is aritrary, irrational and unecessary.


[ Reply to This ]


Leges humanae nascuntur, vivunt, moriuntur
Human laws are born, live, and die

Contributors retain copyright interests in all stories, comments and submissions.
The PHP-Nuke engine on which LawMeme runs is copyright by PHP-Nuke, and is freely available under the GNU GPL.
Everything else is copyright copyright 2002-04 by the Information Society Project.

This material may be distributed only subject to the terms and conditions
set forth in the Open Publication License, v1.0 or later.
The latest version is currently available at http://www.opencontent.org/openpub/.

You can syndicate our news with backend.php



Page Generation: 0.231 Seconds