Old Public Doman Melodies & Settings (carols) - Completely New Songs
Posted: 16 Dec 2020 20:02
Old Public Doman Melodies & Settings (carols) - Completely New Songs
Hello people! I have questions about the fundamental identity of new works based on old public domain works which are popularly known.
i.e., based on "Christmas carols".
I have created a set of 12 songs, set to 4 part harmonies, for a collection of NEW holiday carols. The melodies of all the songs are derived from well-known public domain works, whose arrangements are also in the Public Domain.
1. Knowing the history of "Christmas carols", it's clear that for even for some of the most vaunted among them, their histories with attribution are somewhat murky. For example, the melody of "Hark the Herald Angels Sing" was lifted from a secular Cantata by Mendellssohn, re-named, and now almost everyone thinks of that melody as being "Hark", etc. The tune's identity was totally transformed by the popularity of the new lyrics and title, those lyrics having ALSO been lifted from an earlier tune (having been written by Charles Wesley and George Whitefield without knowing what notes those words would eventually land upon). The English church organist whose arrangment of "Hark" is in the public domain, merely married Mendelssohn's tune with Wesley and Whitefield's song.
I have created NEW, spiritual carols, using known "Christmas carols" for the melodies and settings.
As a a classical instrumentalist, I define "song" as being the poetic words, the lyrics. Just as melodies are "lifted" and repurposed, so are "songs/lyrics". My rock 'n roll friends call EVERYTHING a "song". I don't.
As such, my new song isn't based on "Hark" (which is its own song). The one I'm submitting is absolutely new, with its own identity. Under its own title, I want it to reference the original complete composition by Mendelssohn, which is NOT "Hark", but "Vaterland in deinen Gauen" - both lyrics and melody.
2. The input forms for CPDL licensing seem to assume that ownership of any choral piece is with the composer. That's generally true, but the above example shows that WORDS (i.e., the "song", composed of title and lyrics), can dominate the identity of a piece - thereby redefining it.
3. According to CPDL, is a "song" by the lyricist, or is it by the "composer", however unwitting that composer may be of the song?
4. Is there, in CPDL, a way to indicate that a song's primary identity comes from the lyricist/author, rather than the composer?
5. When the author of the song, composer, and arranger diverge (assuming the latters' efforts are in the Public Domain), which whole or part of the new piece gets licensed? Does the CPDL license/copyright apply to the combined result (song + composed melody + arrangement), semi-combined result (song + newly composed arrangement), just the "song" lyrics alone, or all applicable combinations?
Hello people! I have questions about the fundamental identity of new works based on old public domain works which are popularly known.
i.e., based on "Christmas carols".
I have created a set of 12 songs, set to 4 part harmonies, for a collection of NEW holiday carols. The melodies of all the songs are derived from well-known public domain works, whose arrangements are also in the Public Domain.
1. Knowing the history of "Christmas carols", it's clear that for even for some of the most vaunted among them, their histories with attribution are somewhat murky. For example, the melody of "Hark the Herald Angels Sing" was lifted from a secular Cantata by Mendellssohn, re-named, and now almost everyone thinks of that melody as being "Hark", etc. The tune's identity was totally transformed by the popularity of the new lyrics and title, those lyrics having ALSO been lifted from an earlier tune (having been written by Charles Wesley and George Whitefield without knowing what notes those words would eventually land upon). The English church organist whose arrangment of "Hark" is in the public domain, merely married Mendelssohn's tune with Wesley and Whitefield's song.
I have created NEW, spiritual carols, using known "Christmas carols" for the melodies and settings.
As a a classical instrumentalist, I define "song" as being the poetic words, the lyrics. Just as melodies are "lifted" and repurposed, so are "songs/lyrics". My rock 'n roll friends call EVERYTHING a "song". I don't.
As such, my new song isn't based on "Hark" (which is its own song). The one I'm submitting is absolutely new, with its own identity. Under its own title, I want it to reference the original complete composition by Mendelssohn, which is NOT "Hark", but "Vaterland in deinen Gauen" - both lyrics and melody.
2. The input forms for CPDL licensing seem to assume that ownership of any choral piece is with the composer. That's generally true, but the above example shows that WORDS (i.e., the "song", composed of title and lyrics), can dominate the identity of a piece - thereby redefining it.
3. According to CPDL, is a "song" by the lyricist, or is it by the "composer", however unwitting that composer may be of the song?
4. Is there, in CPDL, a way to indicate that a song's primary identity comes from the lyricist/author, rather than the composer?
5. When the author of the song, composer, and arranger diverge (assuming the latters' efforts are in the Public Domain), which whole or part of the new piece gets licensed? Does the CPDL license/copyright apply to the combined result (song + composed melody + arrangement), semi-combined result (song + newly composed arrangement), just the "song" lyrics alone, or all applicable combinations?