[Foundation-l] Google Translate now assists with human translations of Wikipedia articles
bdamokos at gmail.com
Tue Jun 9 22:08:51 UTC 2009
I couldn't dwelve into the TOS, but as I see it you start with a GFDL text
and end up uploading a text directly to Wikipedia; which implies that Google
is okay with their text being used that way (you don't have to copy-paste,
google uploads the text for you, although it is saved under your username,
the edit summary and the text linking back to the oiginal soure article).
I guess, what's more interesting than adhering to Wikimedia's licensing
terms (which is implicit in the process) is what rights does Google gain to
your improved sentence-by-sentence translations. (They certainly use it as
translation suggestions, for one).
On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 12:01 AM, Amir E. Aharoni <amir.aharoni at gmail.com>wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 00:54, geni<geniice at gmail.com> wrote:
> > 2009/6/9 Brian <Brian.Mingus at colorado.edu>:
> >> We should take the ToS to make sure the translated text can be CC-BY-SA
> >> licensed.
> >> /Brian
> > Under Google's TOS you cannot enter CC or GFDL produced by someone
> > else into the translation tool.
> Where exactly do the TOS say it? I couldn't find it.
> They would never find out about it anyway. In the current state of
> things, any machine-translated text has to be edited manually and thus
> it is not very different from translating a text using a dictionary -
> and i believe that a human translator doesn't have to pay per-word
> royalties to the dictionary publisher.
> An unedited machine-translated text is likely to be speedily deleted
> as patent nonsense, before copyvio is even considered.
> אמיר אלישע אהרוני
> Amir Elisha Aharoni
> "We're living in pieces,
> I want to live in peace." - T. Moore
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
More information about the foundation-l