Re: Using freetranslation.mobi to translate .po files
"Clark C. Evans" <cce@clarkevans.com> writes:
> On Mon, Mar 12, 2012, at 02:09 PM, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
> > Now Petter had the idea to feed this into google translations,
> > using http://freetranslation.mobi and committed the result
> > back into the debian-edu-doc svn repository.
>
> I don't think you can do this.
>
> #1 Translations are copyrightable. Small translations may be
> non-copyrightable or fair use, but from what I understand,
> we're talking about the translation of a whole manual.
Translations done manually by a person are copyrightable, on the theory
that there is creative expression involved in producing the translation.
When there is only an automated process producing the translation, and
no creative decision made in the course of producing that translation,
on what basis is the result under a new copyright?
> #2 Copyright is automatic, not something you need to claim.
Copyright is automatic on works of creative expression.
How is it automatic on something produced by an entirely mechanical,
non-creative process?
> #4 FreeTranslation doesn't have a terms of service
Nor can I find any information at that site on whether a person is
involved making creative decisions on any work of translation it
produces.
But my understanding is that the site procudes translations in an
entirely mechanical, automated manner without creative decisions. Is
that not the case?
> The other argument is that the translation service is fully automated
> and hence there is no expressive creativity in the translations.
Yes. This negates your arguments about copyright obtaining automatically
to the output, since AIUI copyright is applicable only for specific
works of creative expression by a person.
> I think this is a false assumption, the service itself required
> creativity to implement, and the specific choice of word associations
> in specific contexts is not algorithmic nor factual, but individual
> calls by translation submitters who have granted the translation
> service license to use their work.
By the same argument, the GCC copyright holders can claim to hold
copyright in every program compiled using GCC, and the copyright holders
in PHP can claim copyright in every web page that program renders. I
think that's exactly as unsound as the argument you present.
> I suggest that the developer may want to *contact* Google tell
> them what you wish.
Yes, I agree with that advice. It's rarely wise to make assumptions
about the law, or of the intent of copyright holders, based on logical
coherence or cogency.
But just as much, I'd resist the assumption that Google have any claim
to copyright in the product of automated processes they happen to have
designed.
--
\ “The only tyrant I accept in this world is the still voice |
`\ within.” —Mohandas K. Gandhi |
_o__) |
Ben Finney
Reply to: