{Disclaimer - I have not waded through the entirety of the other Collection thread, so perhaps this has already been address)

Quick answer (opinion). The Ethical Collector MUST follow all applicable laws, and must make every reasonable effort to ensure he/she KNOWS what laws apply to whom. Secondarily, he/she SHOULD also acknowledge sources as a courtesy to the source and service to later scholars.

For purpose of my point, let me limit "Folk Music" to those songs/tunes for which the composer is unknown/unknowable. (I'm not saying this is the "correct" definition for Folk - just using it for this one discussion). Also, this is just my own uneducated opinion.

A person who "Collects" Folk Music these days probably ought to document their sources to make their collection more useful as a scholarly resource and to demonstrate that he/she understands and follows applicable laws. I believe an Ethical Collector will discuss his intention to publish with the Source. Whether or not the collector "owes" anything to the source is between the two of them. Citation of the source(s) in the publication may not be REQUIRED, but it certainly seems appropriate for someone who has even a tiny interest in scholarship.

The Ethical Collector will take steps to ensure he/she knows the copyright status of a piece before publishing. This may involve extra research to find additional sources & cross-references, rather than simply taking one Source's word that the piece is "Traditional".

There could very well be a gray area in Copyright law if the collector Publishes a detailed Arrangement of a Folk Song that is substantially identical to how the Source performs it. Personally, I believe if the tune is in Public Domain, then a simple lead line and chord progression is not sufficiently unique to deserve copyright protection (but I'm not a shyster - er, "copyright lawyer" - so my belief may be wrong)

Publication of a Collection of folk songs may be copyrighted, just like any book. If the Arrangements are sufficiently complex as to be a unique Creation by someone, then copyright protection may be applied to the Arrangements. But not to the songs themselves.

Copyright ought not be issued nor protected for a song that has previously been legally in the Public Domain. That's my opinion. An Ethical Collector will not seek copyright protection for anything that he/she did not create.

It behooves anyone who publishes or records a song to verify whether it is in Public Domain or if the any rights are still active. If there is an active copyright, then take the appropriate steps to follow the law (that is, do whatever is required to secure permission from the appropriate person/entity. It might not be as difficult or expensive as you think.) Documenting this permission in the publication may not be required but it seems to me like a good idea. (i.e "song Traditional, arrangement copyright John Doe, used by permission")

If the piece is definitely in the Public Domain, but the composer is known, then the Ethical Collector will cite the composer. Additionally, he/she may/might/could include a footnote about the Public Domain status of the piece just to preempt future inquiries. (i.e. "Written by Henry Tudor, 1491-1547")

Someone who knowingly tries to steal publication or recording rights from a composer or arranger is not, and cannot be, an Ethical Collector. Someone who does not bother to even try to verify copyright status of a piece is too careless to be called an Ethical Collector. Beyond those simple statements, the Lawyers get involved and things can get ugly, as previous messages have implied.

Val