Printing out words....! (of Mass Parts!)

[Do Not Be Afraid]

I know this is a fairly basic question, but I have heard so many different answers to it, I thought I would come here for some definitive thoughts!!

It concerns specifically the creation of "words handouts" for the sung Mass parts, such as the Sanctus and Mystery of Faith.

In our parish, we have done quite well with new Mass Settings the last two years - naturally given the rules around the adherence to the text, I have often been able to tell the Parishioners to just follow the words in their books/cards or missals etc, and therefore they only have a "tune" to learn. We have however come a little unstuck with some of the revised/updated settings where there is sometimes small repetition etc as the composer tries to fit the new words (basically) to the old music.

At a recent Diocesan Music day, we were introduced to the Haas Mass for a New World. I sent off for a copy and have had an enjoyable play through it, and I think have decided it will be a suitable next challenge for our Parish; I think it will go well with Eastertide I think. Again, in very small part, there is some repetition (eg) in the Sanctus.

I am wondering therefore if it is permissible to make little "handouts" of the words in these situations, and put them within the hymnbooks, at least for the first few weeks until people get the hang of it.

I an only talking about words, nothing more. I have not done this with hymns - I know many do, but I appreciate there are certainly copyright issues there. We don't any longer have any kind of "license" to be able to copy - we used to have, but Fr has been reluctant to renew it. I understand about the various infringements with copying, but this question specifically is about parts of the Mass which are already in many Missals (though with the odd extra "Hosanna", or "Until you come again", etc).

I would appreciate any thoughts, especially if you know this is OK, or also helpfully if you know it is NOT OK!
Thanks in advance......

[gwyn]

Hi DNBA.
To the best of my knowledge it's fine to reproduce the new translation text, I usually add the following:

Excerpts from the English translation and chants of The Roman Missal © 2010
International Commission on English in the Liturgy Corporation. All rights reserved.

I think that it was via this forum that this guidance came.

Like you, I'd be interested to learn whether this is still ok or ithe perceived wisdom has maybe changed.

[Peter]

I agree with Gwyn if the text quoted is exactly the ICEL text and indeed I include a similar text to his as a "catch-all" in the Mass sheets I prepare for my church.

The question is: if words in the ICEL text are repeated to fit a musical setting do they remain ICEL's property or does the copyright then belong to the composer who made the adaptation to fit his/her music?

[JW]

I would suggest you contact Decani Music (who run the Calamus license) for their take on this. ICEL would have given David Haas specific permission to use that particular form of words only for use with his setting. If you then reproduce those words without permission either from ICEL or the composer, are you not infringing that permission? Sue Dean at Decani is very helpful in these matters and I'm sure she can clear it up without cost to your parish.

[musicus]

The question is: if words in the ICEL text are repeated to fit a musical setting do they remain ICEL's property or does the copyright then belong to the composer who made the adaptation to fit his/her music?

No, you can't appropriate someone's copyright by mere repetition (or alteration). It was this kind of thinking that led to the erroneous idea that one could avoid infringing copyright by changing the odd syllable here and there.

[Edited to remove unhelpful example]

[dmu3tem]

Sorry, I am puzzled by the latest contribution.

As I understand it one needs to distinguish between three things:

[1] Copyright on the text

[2] Copyright on the music

[3] Copyright on the printing, reproductive, artwork processes.

The latest response appears to discuss copyright on the music; but the issue here seems to concern the text. There is no proposal to reproduce the music en masse for the congregation here, only a revised form of the text. Likewise there is no proposal to reproduce the printing or artwork, but to make a wholly new copy of that text.

So, in this case, who has copyright of the text? Is it:

[1] ICEL who made the original translation which was then modified by Haas with their permission? This seems the most likely bet to me. If so, I would imagine that ICEL would make no difficulty and one could just go ahead on the lines suggested by some of the other messages above.

[2] Haas, because he has made this new version of the text? If so, then you need his permission or that of the person who published his music. Personally, I think this unlikely, given that he would have had to have got ICEL's permission to make the changes in the first place and, what is more, get it past the 'inspection committee' of the Bishops Conference of England and Wales.

[musicus]

Perhaps I confused things by giving a musical example. I will edit my post to remove that portion (in parentheses). Having done that, I stand by my post (which was intended to discuss the text, not the music).

[Nick Baty]

Whatever a composer does in terms of repetition etc, the setting will still need to be approved by the Permission to Publish Panel of the bishops' conference. Only then will ICEL give permission to publish. However, the deal is that ICEL is still credited as the copyright holder in the publication.

[Southern Comfort]

And here we enter the bizarre world of approval processes. Haas's setting has been approved by the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops' Department for Divine Worship (USCCB BCDW), but has not been approved by the Catholic Bishops' Conference of England and Wales (CBCEW).

This means that you can purchase the sheet music, imported direct from America via Decani Music (distribution soon to be transferred to McCrimmons, we hear), and use it in your parish without problem; but if an England-based publisher wants to republish here or include the setting in a hymn book then it has to be submitted to the Panel's approval process. The likelihood is that approval would be withheld, since the criteria for approval in England and Wales are more stringent than those obtaining in the USA. An interesting situation occurs when a publisher is based in both countries....

[Nick Baty]

But parishes can use music approved by another conference of bishops?

[Southern Comfort]

But parishes can use music approved by another conference of bishops?

It seems self-evident, but doesn't seem to work like that in England and Wales. The music that has been approved in New Zealand, for example, would be shot down in flames by the E&W Panel.

[Nick Baty]

Yes, I realise that but am I right in thinking that aforementioned music can be used in E&W parishes even though it can't be republished here.

[Southern Comfort]

Yes, I realise that but am I right in thinking that aforementioned music can be used in E&W parishes even though it can't be republished here.

Yes, bizarre though it seems.