Change to music licence for Prokofiev’s R&J and Cinderella by US rights owner

[FionaM]

I’m struggling to understand this news … is it a deliberate release of new editions of the music because the original copyright is approaching expiry?  In order to continue earning licensing fees?  Is this common practice?   Seems underhand to me.

 

or does this notice only apply to usage in the USA? 

 

 I’m sure someone here will have better knowledge of music rights.

 

 https://slippedisc.com/2024/01/just-in-publisher-prohibits-use-of-older-prokofiev-scores/

 

Dear Colleagues,

 

We are writing to you today with some important information regarding the ballets ROMEO AND JULIET and CINDERELLA, composed by Sergei Prokofiev. These dramatic stage works, having been conceptualized and created collaboratively by their composer and librettists, are co-authored and receive copyright protection as “joint works,” as do the derivative compositions created from the complete ballets.

 

Both ballets, their derivative concert suites and excerpts, received protection under the Uruguay Round Agreements Act (URAA), and are therefore protected in the United States for a period of 95 years from their initial publication dates. In other territories, the works are protected for the applicable term afforded to copyrighted works; joint works being protected based on the death date of the last surviving co-author. (Please refer to the information below as concerns such relevant dates.)

 

While your organization may own a legally purchased set of score and parts of an earlier edition of these works, we are obliged to inform you that G. Schirmer, Inc., and the Wise Music Group have prepared new performance editions of both ballets as well as their derivative works. These new editions of full scores and instrumental parts are the only editions authorized by the Prokofiev Estate and must be used for all future performances.

For staged performances of these ballets, the licensing of public performance Grand Rights remains mandatory for performances which take place with either live musicians and/or with recorded accompaniment.

 

• When performing these works with live accompaniment a rental agreement must be obtained in addition to a public performance “Grand Rights” license.
• When performing with only recorded accompaniment, a public performance “Grand Rights” license must be obtained.

 

Please know that the right to perform any work in public is within the exclusive province of the composer in the first instance. Sergei Prokofiev assigned the public performance right to G. Schirmer within its territory, with a reservation of the right of absolute approval over the edition that is used to perform the work publicly. The Kalmus edition, and any other unofficial performance materials made available prior to restoration of copyright under the URAA have no such approval and their use to perform the works publicly is unauthorized.

ASCAP, as the assignee of the public performance right from G. Schirmer, can have no greater rights than the rights that Prokofiev gave to G. Schirmer. Therefore, the public performance licenses from ASCAP to orchestras, ballet companies, venues, and festivals are valid only for public performances using the edition approved by Prokofiev and licensed for performance to ASCAP by G. Schirmer as Prokofiev’s assignee. Grand Rights licenses will not be issued for live performances which do not utilize the new editions, and ASCAP licenses for non-dramatic performances shall not be valid when unauthorized performance materials are used.

Wise Music Group reserves the right to retroactively license and invoice unreported performances which are discovered. Such performances shall be subject to penalty fees.

 

ROMEO AND JULIET:
BALLET IN 4 ACTS, OP. 64 (1935-36)

Composed by Sergei Prokofiev
Co-Authors:
Librettist – Sergei Radlov (1892-1958)
Librettist – Adrian Piotrovsky (1898-1938)
Librettist – Leonid Lavrovsky (1905-1967)
wisemusicclassical.com/work/31702/Romeo-and-Juliet–Sergei-Prokofiev

 

CINDERELLA:
BALLET IN 3 ACTS, OP. 87 (1940-44)

Composed by Sergei Prokofiev
Co-Author:
Librettist – Nicolas Volkov (d. 1965)
wisemusicclassical.com/work/31718/Cinderella–Sergei-Prokofiev

 

For information about rental material and licensing of public performance rights, please direct enquiries to the Rental/Licensing Department or agent of Wise Music in your territory.
wisemusicclassical.com/rental
wisemusicclassical.com/licensing

For additional information and to view online perusal scores, please visit the URLs of the works’ pages on the Wise Music Classical website as noted above. We look forward to assisting you with licensing your future productions and concert performances of these ballets.

Edited January 16 by FionaM
Typo

[Jan McNulty]

@Terpsichore may understand this more than me.

 

But the implications could be enormous for any ballet company that has a production of R&J.

[Roberta]

27 minutes ago, Jan McNulty said:

But the implications could be enormous for any ballet company that has a production of R&J.

 

It sounds as though it could be very expensive indeed for ballet companies and I hope it isn't the end of R & J being performed.  Northern Ballet is struggling enough financially as it is.  

[Pas de Quatre]

UK copyright, (and European I believe) is not the same as that in USA. Here copyright lasts for 70 years after the death of the creator, not counting years of war. Prokofiev died in March 1953, so the 70 years is up this year, but presumably 5 or 6 years should be added for the 2nd World War. 

[Sim]

2 minutes ago, Pas de Quatre said:

UK copyright, (and European I believe) is not the same as that in USA. Here copyright lasts for 70 years after the death of the creator, not counting years of war. Prokofiev died in March 1953, so the 70 years is up this year, but presumably 5 or 6 years should be added for the 2nd World War. 

Plus two further years for the Covid disaster.

[alison]

Terpsichore will doubtless know a lot more about it than me, but to my only slightly experienced eyes it does look as though it could be an attempt to extend copyright.

[Sophoife]

It's only applicable to the United States, that's fairly clear in the letter quoted by Norman Lebrecht (who does have the occasional panic stations).

10 hours ago, FionaM said:

Both ballets, their derivative concert suites and excerpts, received protection under the Uruguay Round Agreements Act (URAA), and are therefore protected in the United States for a period of 95 years from their initial publication dates. In other territories, the works are protected for the applicable term afforded to copyrighted works; joint works being protected based on the death date of the last surviving co-author. (Please refer to the information below as concerns such relevant dates.)

 

G. Schirmer holds the North American rights only.

 

In Australia, as Prokofiev died before 1 January 1955, his works entered the public domain on that date. Grand Rights (performance) must be paid for, however. I think it's through Hal Leonard. I'll check my programmes of both ballets when I get home.

 

For the UK and parts of Europe, to quote from the Boosey and Hawkes website:

 

Territory

This work is available from Boosey & Hawkes / Sikorski for the UK, British Commonwealth (excluding Canada), Republic of Ireland, Germany, Switzerland, Denmark, Iceland, Norway, Sweden, Netherlands, Spain, Portugal, Greece, Turkey, Israel.

 

 

Edited January 17 by Sophoife
Added I'll check...

[Sophoife]

Oh I answered my own research question. Grand Rights for Australia must be sought through Boosey and Hawkes, given that we're still part of the British Commonwealth.

[Roberta]

The comments under the article are interesting and probably worth watching as they are being added to.   https://slippedisc.com/2024/01/just-in-publisher-prohibits-use-of-older-prokofiev-scores/

[Sophoife]

The comments on the article referred to above are, apart from one or two exceptions, ignorant, ill-informed and reactionary. Only interesting in that they demonstrate the typical BTL commenter doesn't only exist at the Daily Mail 🤣

 

Only one commenter appears to know that Schirmer's new editions (requested by the Prokofiev estate) only apply to the USA and Canada. The rest haven't read the letter properly.

[Roberta]

I made no mention of what I thought of the merits or otherwise of the comments, I merely pointed out they were 'interesting' and being added to so who knows, a real diamond could be being posted even as I type.  

[alison]

Well, in all fairness, the letter is rather obfuscatory, and we didn't know who it was being sent to, so it wasn't too obvious that it was North America only.  And "In other territories, the works are protected for the applicable term afforded to copyrighted works; joint works being protected based on the death date of the last surviving co-author." might be taken as meaning that copyright would still apply elsewhere, too.  (That said, I don't see how Lavrovsky could possibly be named as a co-author, since he wasn't involved in the initial R&J ballet, let alone the score's creation.  I'm not sure about the other alleged librettists)

 

Edit: actually, I'm not sure about that last point.  Was the score originally created for the Kirov, but they initially rejected it?

[Roberta]

32 minutes ago, alison said:

Edit: actually, I'm not sure about that last point.  Was the score originally created for the Kirov, but they initially rejected it?

 

 It's... complicated  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Romeo_and_Juliet_(Prokofiev)

[Sophoife]

1 hour ago, alison said:

Well, in all fairness, the letter is rather obfuscatory, and we didn't know who it was being sent to, so it wasn't too obvious that it was North America only. 

 

Oh, I thought it was extremely clear.

 

"...are therefore protected in the United States for a period of 95 years from their initial publication dates. In other territories, the works are protected for the applicable term afforded to copyrighted works; joint works being protected based on the death date of the last surviving co-author. (Please refer to the information below as concerns such relevant dates.)"

 

In addition, a North American music professional would certainly know that Schirmer holds the rights in North America, not Boosey and Hawkes or another such company.

 

Clearly a lot of the BTL commenters are not music professionals judging by their knee-jerk responses.

[FionaM]

So my read is, in USA the copyright has been extended for 95 years from the date of this new edition.  
 

Elsewhere the R&J copyright doesn’t expire until 70 years after the death of Lavrovsky, as they are citing him as an co-author.  

 Therefore in copyright until 2037, being 1967 plus 70.

 

Similarly for Cinderella, in copyright until 2035.

 

It all seems underhand to me, it should be the date of the composer’s death.  The librettists have all chopped, extended and mixed up the score to suit their purposes.  Lavrovsky’s version is no more valid as a librettist than anyone who followed.  we could pick Matthew Bourne and Johan Kobborg whose versions were made in 2019 and both men are still alive.  
 

The musicians, theatres, etc need a class action I feel. 
 

 

[MAB]

Quote

Elsewhere the R&J copyright doesn’t expire until 70 years after the death of Lavrovsky, as they are citing him as an co-author. 

 

That must surely only apply when his production is being danced.

[Sophoife]

The key point about it is that this letter refers only to North American copyright (the rights administered by Schirmer's).

 

Boosey and Hawkes' listing names four creators, including Lavrovsky, and the territories affected are listed. There is no suggestion at this time that they are to put out a new edition, although given that Schirmer's state the new scores are at the request of the Prokofiev estate, that is a future possibility.

 

[FionaM]

On 17/01/2024 at 14:04, MAB said:

 

That must surely only apply when his production is being danced.

and this is a dance forum! 

[bridiem]

13 minutes ago, FionaM said:

and this is a dance forum! 

 

I think MAB's meaning was that it could only apply when it is his production rather than a different one that is being danced.

[FionaM]

1 minute ago, bridiem said:

 

I think MAB's meaning was that it could only apply when it is his production rather than a different one that is being danced.

thank you for the clarification.  Got it.   So that means it is still in licence for Mariinsky and now Bolshoi performing Lavrovsky choreo.  Unless there are different licence rules in Russia, and especially for Prokofiev.  

[Sophoife]

Er, @FionaM, we've been through a similar discussion before. Copyright doesn't appear to be respected in Russia at this time, so I doubt if they'd care.

[FionaM]

13 minutes ago, Sophoife said:

Er, @FionaM, we've been through a similar discussion before. Copyright doesn't appear to be respected in Russia at this time, so I doubt if they'd care.

Well it was Russian ballet fan friends who mentioned this issue to me in the first place, and then I found the article originally posted.  So it’s a real concern  at the Bolshoi where they are planning to perform Lavrovsky’s R&J.  
 

@Sophoife do you have evidence of a production that is being performed without licence?  I know Neumeier withdrew the licence for Onegin at Bolshoi and so it is no longer performed.   That action doesn’t support your argument.  

[Sophoife]

I will refer you to this thread. I'm not going to engage with you otherwise on this Fiona.

 

https://www.balletcoforum.com/topic/27125-a-new-production-of-the-pharaohs-daughter/

[FionaM]

20 hours ago, FionaM said:

 I know Neumeier withdrew the licence for Onegin at Bolshoi and so it is no longer performed.   

correcting myself.  (Surprised no one jumped on my obvious error!)

 

Actually the licences for both Onegin by Cranko and La Dame aux Camelias by Neumeier expired, and the Bolshoi Theatre has honoured both.