We do not charge for downloads of original works uploaded by the composer.
But you charge for downloads of works of artists who are not represented by your partners.
That is a user generated categorization (see the edit and merge functions at top right of page).
Right, and? Please answer the question: are you authorized to collect royalties on the compositions (none of which are PD as far as I can tell) in that category?
MuseScore has relationships with more than 2,000 publishers. If any rights holder wishes for any of their works to be taken down from MuseScore.com they may file a DMCA request for it to be taken down.
ZUN does not have a relationship with any general music publisher or rights association, only individual companies using his compositions in their derivative works and a very specific music distributor which is not in the business of scores or of partnering with MuseScore; I am completely confident that you do not have a partnership that covers his works.
As I'm sure you're aware, the DMCA incorporates the concept of "red flag", where an entity that is knowingly infringing and the infringement would be apparent to a reasonable person, is not afforded the protections of safe harbor laws.
Given that you are collecting payment for all of those scores, and have a flag on your system that marks them as non-PD, and have relationships with publishers which obviously entitles you to know what compositions you do have the right to distribute for a fee and collect royalties on... I'm not sure the DMCA shield is as impenetrable for your case as you think it is.
Further, the DMCA explicitly excludes from safe harbor those entities which derive a direct financial benefit from the infringing activity. You fall squarely in that category. You are not entitled to safe harbor protection for scores you paywall.
It's one thing to host mis-labeled user generated content (e.g. someone uploads a score and tags the composition as PD when it isn't). It's quite another to be charging a subscription fee for access to material, which you have tagged as such, that you do not actually hold a license to.
If any rights holder believes that their work is either available on Musescore.com without their consent or that the incorrect license is attributed to the score, they may file a DMCA request or contact the Copyright Agent also listed on the DMCA link to clarify any licensing.
See above.
They are not public domain. They are not managed by your partners. For the upteenth time: why do you not offer an option to mark such compositions as OK for free download?
I do agree we should improve our licensing options and we are actively working on this, but the challenge is with the way CC licensing works in the context of the broader music publishing industry and standard practices that we must also follow.
What is the challenge? It is as simple as allowing compositions to be tagged CC or otherwise "not subject to the subscription fee". People who want to illegitimately upload scores of copyrighted compositions under your partners' control and bypass the paywall can already do so by marking them as original or PD. There is absolutely zero risk to your partners in adding more options that could be used to accomplish the same thing. It would just fix the problem you have for those songs which you don't have partnerships for, and put you in a better position liability-wise, as you would be giving the users the tools they need to accurately tag compositions and thus ensure compliance.
Right now, your UX is deliberately designed to mislead users into believing it is legitimate and correct to upload scores based on arbitrary copyrighted compositions, then assuming you have a license to those compositions through your partners.
If a rights holder of a work wishes to make a work available as public domain, we must verify directly with the rights holder of that work their intent to make this public domain. Any written copyright statement on the work is not sufficient if work is submitted by a third party.
It's not "public domain". Are you sure you understand how copyright law works? It is perfectly fine for copyright holders to give permission for users to upload derivative works, and that is how licenses work, without making anything public domain. You absolutely do not need to "verify" anything directly with the rights holder; this is what DMCA safe harbor law is for. You are not going to be under any extra liability for allowing users to tag compositions under the correct license.
And again - the problem isn't that you're banning and removing those things. The problem is you leave them up on your site and then charge royalties for them. You keep distracting away from that point, as if this were merely an issue of infringing user-generated content. It is not. You are actively claiming every non-PD/non-original composition categorized on your website is managed by your partners by default. That is insane. That is much more likely to get you in legal hot water than people mis-tagging stuff on upload on purpose.
Accordingly, any work that may be considered to be in the public domain but does not meet the statutory requirements for automatic designation as public domain (i.e. - time since death of composer) must be assumed to be a copyrighted work unless verified with the creator/rights holder of the work.
And that is perfectly fine. But the problem is not that you're assuming it's copyrighted. The problem is that you're assuming it's copyrighted and that you're entitled to distribute it, collect royalties, and send them off to a random third party.
MuseScore is DMCA compliant.
(c) INFORMATION RESIDING ON SYSTEMS OR NETWORKS AT DIRECTION OF USERS.-
'(1) IN GENERAL.-A service provider shall not be liable for monetary relief, or, except as provided in subsection (j), for injunctive or other equitable relief, for infringement of copyright by reason of the storage at the direction of a user of material that resides on a system or network controlled or operated by or for the service provider, if the service provider-
(A)(i) does not have actual knowledge that the material or an activity using the material on the system or network is infringing;
(ii) in the absence of such actual knowledge, is not aware of facts or circumstances from which infringing activity is apparent; or
(iii) upon obtaining such knowledge or awareness, acts expeditiously to remove, or disable access to, the material;
(B) does not receive a financial benefit directly attributable to the infringing activity, in a case in which the service provider has the right and ability to control such activity; and
(C) upon notification of claimed infringement as de-scribed in paragraph (3), responds expeditiously to remove, or disable access to, the material that is claimed to be infringing or to be the subject of infringing activity.
Sorry, you fail clause B. You are not entitled to safe harbor provisions, and are therefore committing copyright infringement.
MuseScore was DMCA compliant until you started charging for scores by default.
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.3