Against Lionel Sawkins’s arguments is the fact that, after the first court case, the musicians at the centre of this (Ex Cathedra’s director and a colleague) went on to make their own edition of some pieces by Lalande, going back to the primary sources and, I suppose, not looking at Sawkins’s scores. This work didn’t take them terribly long and, with computer help, it wasn’t all that arduous. Ex Cathedra performed these pieces in a concert. The results were reported to be fine.

A similar case has been that of the poet John Clare, with a contemporary academic claiming copyright on his edition of the works. Recently the writer Iain Sinclair was reported as going back to the manuscripts to make his own edition, for his book on Clare (just out).

The moral: anyone can be their own editor of manuscripts that are publicly accessible and which are of a sufficent age. Don’t let self-aggrandizing editors claim too much.

There’s an interesting write up here, which makes clear, I think, why this is a bad decision. Still, as I read more about the facts I understand why this case was more complicated than one might first assume.