User talk:Bobnotts/Help:What scores are welcome for submission at CPDL?

free access

Hi Rob, looks good to me. One small remark, though: if you require a work to be accessible through free software, I'm not quite sure Finale files qualify. Last time I checked, Notepad had become paying software (just a couple of bucks, I seem to recall, but still), and the viewer will probably be completely outdated in a matter of months/years (which is the problem with nearly all the Di Marco scores). I think we should either request pdf files as a minimum, or leave out this passage altogether. Just my 5 cents. Cordially, joachim 12:20, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for alerting me to this, Joachim. Whenever I open files from Manfred Hößl's website (which is about the only place linked from CPDL where one needs to use Finale Notepad), I use my full version of Finale instead. I'll mention this to the other admins and see if we can sort something out. I agree that PDF is definitely the easiest format for users but for some contributors for whom webspace is limited, something like Sibelius Scorch is preferable. Do you know if Finale Notepad was once free? --Bobnotts talk 17:29, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

Hi Rob, Notepad used to be free till somewhere during 2007, at least I recall suggesting it to friends as a great free resource for elementary score writing up to then. It was too good to last, though (never really understood why it was free in the first place: an experienced user good come up with a pretty good-looking, standard SATB and keyboard score). Still, as far is the viewer is concerned (di Marco scores, and possibly others): the safest and most accessible option would be to create pdfs for them and post them on the respective score pages. I'm not sure where that would put us copyright-wise, but since he has the 'print' function on the viewer enabled, I could hardly see what he could have against it. Cordially, joachim 17:47, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

public domain, etc.

Posted by: Vaarky 19:51, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

Help

This is an excellent start! Here are a bunch of thoughts. I think point two creates legal confusion. I would suggest something such as: 2. Editions must be of works which are either: in the public domain in the USA (including all elements of the work included in the edition - music, text, any translations, editorial material, etc.); or have the copyright owner's consent for use of any materials not in the public domain; or are original works by the editor. Then paragraph 3 can elaborate regarding copyrighted works as follows: _Copyrighted_ (you had Original) works must be contributed with the _copyright owner's_ (you had composer/arranger's, but as we have seen, sometimes the composer/arranger is no longer tte copyright holder) express permission... Also, free access is ambiguous because it can mean either "no cost" or "no encumbrances" (e.g. relgious use only--atheists not permitted to download and sing this score in their living room, even though it's on CPDL, sorry). Whether a score can be posted if it includes such exclusionary restrictions is a policy matter that needs further discussion, and should be addressed in the doc that tells people under what conditions a score can't be hosted on CPDL. Two procedural thoughts: Now that we have intellectual property counsel for CPDL, we should have them reivew it before finalizing it out of draft form when we get to that point. We should think about which types of policy-related postings constitute a material change to CPDL policy or other type of important clarification, and develop a process for alerting users about that.