[Foundation-l] foundation-l Digest, Vol 85, Issue 52

[Ray Saintonge]

On 04/25/11 7:06 PM, WJhonson at aol.com wrote:
> I always thought that translations were considered "wholely derivative",
> that is that a new copyright is *not* created, by translating.

It would be nice if things could be that easy; a third person using the 
translation must respect the copyright of both the author and 
translator, even when the translation is an infringement.  I know of no 
law that distinguishes wholly derivative from partly derivative. Some 
translations, especially of poetry, take a great deal of skill and 
originality to convey the sense of the source language. Translations of 
the same work by different translators can vary considerably.

Ray

> In a message dated 4/25/2011 1:57:34 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
> saintonge at telus.net writes:
>
> The translation would give rise to a  new copyright *in addition* to
> yours. You would be infringing their  copyright. This all assumes that it
> was a human translation.  If it  was a machine translation the argument
> could be made that as a mechanical  process it lacked the originality
> needed to acquire copyright.
>