In a message dated 4/26/2011 12:08:42 AM Pacific Daylight Time, smolensk(a)eunet.rs writes: This doesn't exactly address the point. A work is copyright, a translation enjoys that *same* copyright. It doesn't create an additional independent copyright. This was the situation when Harriet Beecher Stowe tried to sue for people translating her work. That's why the US law changed IIRC. A translation, under US law, as I understand it, is a derivative work, and thus can be made, under the same copyright protection, but does not create an additional copyright distinct from the original work.