Copyright status of "Bolero" and "Ma Vlast&qu

[Vivaldi]

Hi, I have two miniature scores here that I would like to contribute to IMSLP. I would like to know the copyright status of these two works in Canada.

The first work is Bedrich Smetana's cycle of symphonic poems - Ma Vlast.
All six movements are published in one score. The copyright notice states: Copyright 1951 by Orbis, Prague (now Editio Supraphon) with the plate number H3796. The main title page has an additional copyright notice of 1987 EDITIO SUPRAPHON (PRAHA) with the foreword by Frantisek Bratos.

The second work is Maurice Ravel's Bolero. It is published by a Japanese company - Ongaku-No-Tomo with the copyright notice: Copyright 1999 by ONGAKU NO TOMO SHA CORP, Tokyo, Japan.

Thank you.

[Carolus]

The Orbis score is an Urtext edition whose copyright was not renewed in the USA. It's free in Canada, the USA, and the EU. Upload away.

Of what nature is the Bolero score? Is it an arrangement? A reprint? There is a 1999 copyright claim, which if valid would preclude posting on IMSLP. Not all copyright claims are valid of course, especially if they simply reprinted the Durand score and affixed the copyright notice. More information is needed. We have the 1929 Durand score available at IMSLP. Feldmahler is working on a modification of the temporary blocking so that works with 2 green (V) or gray (C) tags will not be blocked, leaving only works with 2 red tags blocked.

[Vivaldi]

Thank you Carolus for your reply. The Bolero score published by Ongaku No Tomo is the full orchestral score (in miniature score format). It is not a reprint of the Durand edition since the engraving is different altogether. It appears to be a new engraving, with the instrument names in French. Maybe I can scan the first few pages for your reference, Carolus?

[Carolus]

Vivaldi, Is there any sort of editor's credit on the score? Perhaps a preface or afterword in Japanese signed by an editor? It strikes me as odd that Ongaku No Tomo would go to the expense of producing a new score from the ground up without having some editorial claim.

It also might be helpful to compare the Ongaku No Tomo score with the Durand. Are there any differences? If it is a literal re-engraving of the Durand score - note for note, dynamic for dynamic, slur for slur, etc., the copyright claim is dubious. However, I'd be extremely reluctant to allow it here since it still falls under the 25-year limit we observe for retypesets.

I'm wondering if the Ongaku No Tomo score might be a reprint of a urtext edition produced in the 1970s by Peters Leipzig - which was then an agency of the DDR government. They produced new engravings of a fair number of early 20th century works, notably those of Debussy. These pre-1983 editions are PD in the EU and in Canada. Muzyka also produced new engravings of such works during this era. Some were even sent to the same Leipzig firm (Röder) used by Peters.

Go ahead and post a few pages and I'll look it over. I own several of the above-mentioned Debussy scores so a comparison will be possible.

[Vivaldi]

There appears to be a footnote of some sort at the end of the foreword and analysis, perhaps stating a reprint, but I don't understand Japanese. Perhaps there is someone in the forums that can help translate?

Also, Carolus. The fact that Supraphon put in a 1987 copyright notice at the main title page of Ma Vlast does nothing to put the work back into copyright (ie. it's merely a reprint of the 1951 edition originally published by Orbis)?

[Carolus]

No renewal was made for the 1951 score, which has been reprinted by Kalmus. A 1987 notice affixed to a reprint of a 1951 score does not change the public domain status.