They have personally attacked Feldmahler among other things, they have not played it nice. They have not filed a lawsuit because they themselves are not sure of the consequence of the case:UE played it nice, they sent some letters instead of starting a lawsuit right away. They could have.
Hi, Just a quick word of support on behalf of a sister-project, http://LibriVox.org. We've had similar legal threats, pushed back, and succeeded. Copyright lawyers tend to claim rights they do not have. This is the case here.
Anyway, good luck and if there is anything we can do, please let us know.
Actually he is *not* right about copyright law. We have had similar issues at LibriVox.org. We follow the lead of the extensive legal work done by gutenberg.org, and our response to such letters and threats is as follows:
Project Gutenberg has done exhaustive research over the years on this subject, and has not found any indication that the copyright laws of one country will have any force in any other country, even in cases of publishing materials on the Internet or the World Wide Web…
However, if you do come across any new case law or rulings that might effect some change, please let us know and we will discuss with our informal advisers at Project Gutenberg, so that they can update their research concerning such cases. As always, we will follow the legal standard that Project Gutenberg uses.
That is just plain wrong. IMSLP was not distributing works into Europe as that implies a conscious decision to illegally provide Europeans with scores and promote this. That is a lie.Instead of cursing UE, we should look ahead, admit that IMSLP was distributing copyrighted material in the EU
MrPianoMan80 wrote:Hi there,
Feldmahler, you are not to blame for the closure of the site, though it is a truly, truly sad day. My heart sank when I read your statement. I really feel horrible that it had to come to this and wish there was something I could do.
IMSLP was not distributing works into Europe as that implies a conscious decision to illegally provide Europeans with scores and promote this. That is a lie.
PI wrote:Posted on another thread, reposted here.
To all those, who still don't get UE's point.
Let's agree on one thing: there are works on IMSLP which are still under copyright in Europe. It is irrelevant where the server is located. The only thing that matters is that IMSLP is providing service in Europe and as such it has to abide European law. If IMSLP were restricted for Canadians only, then UE would have no problem at all. The only thing they ask is that works whose copyright they hold should not be accessable from the EU. They don't want to enforce European law in Canada. They enforce it in Europe. By no means would IMSLP be brought to court in Canada, it would happen overseas. The rule is very simple: if you don't own the right to distribute a certain work in a certain country then you can't distribute it there. It doesn't matter that you have the right to do so somewhere else.
The Dover example above is wrong. Even Dover could not sell scores of the works in question in the EU, unless they license them from UE. They can't provide the service in the EU, they don't have the right to do so. You can by the score elsewhere and bring it home, but in that case you may violate some import laws (I'm not quite sure on this). But Dover can't sell it to you.
The fact that IMSLP is not for profit is again irrelevant. In the EU it might hurt the sales of UE. They only worry about how much they lose not how much IMSLP makes. They wouldn't even care if IMSLP were actually selling Bartok's works in Canada.
Of course, it is impossible the review all the copyright laws in the world and implement elaborate IP filters to make sure that every person gets what they have the right to. Noone expects this from anybody. But after some country/organization/company shows up and asks you to remove specific content illegal in their country, your options are limited. Either you believe them and abide or you don't believe and go to court. Actually, UE played it nice, they sent some letters instead of starting a lawsuit right away. They could have.
If you still don't get it, consider this: Do you really think that just because something is legal in your country (weed, weapons, banned literature, allofmp3?) you can sell/transfer it to any other country regardless of the laws there, and leave all the responsibility with the recipient??
Instead of cursing UE, we should look ahead, admit that IMSLP was distributing copyrighted material in the EU, remove it (or just make it unaccessable from Europe) and move on.
Certainly, I do hope IMSLP comes back online very soon after all this has been sorted out. As I haven't followed the internal affairs of IMSLP very closely, I don't know about the other events that led to this complete shutdown.
Vivaldi wrote:I suppose UE got what they deserved. But I feel that a boycott is not an answer. Try convincing that to hundreds of orchestras or libraries around the world when they depend on UE's sale or rental of scores of copyrighted music under UE. I don't think it is going to happen on a very large scale that is going to affect UE, not in the long run anyway.
This limits a majority of the people and countries in the world too much. It is better that IMSLP comes back strong in a month than crippled now.Maybe as some other people suggested exclude works newer than 70 years.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest