# Translating works of art



## justin

I know you have a policy here of not allowing more than 2 or 3 lines of poetry or lyrics that are not in the public domain. This will probably not protect anyone because all but the most recent written compositions are readily available on Google for the asking, but I do see your point. However, what is the harm in translating an entire poem or song? When one does that, it transforms the original so that it can hardly be called "taking the money out of their pockets". When one translates, one recreates. I hope you will think this rule over and at least allow translations, so long as the original is not reproduced in full. Thank you.


----------



## cuchuflete

Hi Justin,

Let me state first that the answers to your question have many dimensions, including legal and ethical aspects.

According to copyright law, not the opinion of WordReference or me or forero "X", but law...

A translation is considered to be a derivative work based on the original work of a copyright owner, and that derivative work is also considered, legally, the property of the owner of the copyright for the original.

You and I might share coffee and conversation and decide that, in our joint opinion, a translation is an original all by itself, and that the prior original is just a source of inspiration.
In fact, a translation may also be copyright!  However, the law says what it says, and our personal opinions will not change it.

What we do not want to do is make WR the target of legal claims for copyright infringement.  Defending those, successfully or unsuccessfully, would be a major drain on the time, energy, and financial resources of WR.  So, we accept the law as written and interpreted by the courts.

PS- there are lots of litigious people in the world. That said, nothing I have written here should be taken as legal counsel.  If you have any doubts or questions about law, you should consult with an attorney.


----------



## panjandrum

Justin,
Supposing I spent the next ten years researching and writing a best-seller (I wish) in English, and you translated it into Gibrandu and posted it on your website.
Don't you think I might be a little bit annoyed?

It comes as no surprise to me that your translation of my text is still mine.


----------



## justin

panjandrum said:
			
		

> Justin,
> Supposing I spent the next ten years researching and writing a best-seller (I wish) in English, and you translated it into Gibrandu and posted it on your website.
> Don't you think I might be a little bit annoyed?
> 
> It comes as no surprise to me that your translation of my text is still mine.


  No, I'm not talking about a work in prose, but a poem or a song which demands much more creativity, written in a language that the original author is unfamiliar with. Such a translation usually bears little resemblance to the original and will not appeal to the audience for which it was intended. The deleted Frost poem that I translated into French, Stopping by Woods on a Snowy Evening, falls into that category.


----------



## cuchuflete

justin said:
			
		

> No, I'm not talking about a work in prose, but a poem or a song which demands much more creativity, written in a language that the original author is unfamiliar with. Such a translation usually bears little resemblance to the original and will not appeal to the audience for which it was intended.



The assertion that a work in verse requires much more creativity than a prose work is, in the gentlest words I can think of, open to debate.  How are we to know what languages the original author is familiar with, and why does that matter?

If a translation _usually_ bears little resemblance to the original, then it is likely a very poor translation.  Most translations attempt to be as faithful as possible to the original.  

Who are we to unilaterally decide what limits, if any, an author intended at the time of creation of original works?

If one wants to be inspired by an original work, and then create an entirely distinct work, based on that inspiration, then there should be no copyright issue with poetry.  

The law is clear about translations. As I wrote earlier, our personal opinions will not change that.


----------



## Bienvenidos

I would say for personal use (i.e. if I want to see if I can translated this to Swahili, just to check if my grammar is correct) would work. However, the main problem I see with translating these works is that the translation will never have the author's own perspective: some words don't translate well, and each word of a piece of art is the author's own creation, and it has meaning beyond its letters. 

Aside from that, copyright laws are strict, and copyright infringment expensive. 

*Bien*


----------



## justin

cuchuflete said:
			
		

> The assertion that a work in verse requires much more creativity than a prose work is, in the gentlest words I can think of, open to debate.  How are we to know what languages the original author is familiar with, and why does that matter?
> 
> If a translation _usually_ bears little resemblance to the original, then it is likely a very poor translation.  Most translations attempt to be as faithful as possible to the original.
> 
> Who are we to unilaterally decide what limits, if any, an author intended at the time of creation of original works?
> 
> If one wants to be inspired by an original work, and then create an entirely distinct work, based on that inspiration, then there should be no copyright issue with poetry.
> 
> The law is clear about translations. As I wrote earlier, our personal opinions will not change that.


  No, this is not open to debate, because poetic translation demands that the translator render the syllabic count, cadence, stress, meaning and rime of the original, unlike prose where meaning is the only criterium. You are of course right that if said translation bears little resemblance to the original, it is a poor translation, but it is also true that if the translator is too literal, the work will look like prose, in which case why bother. Create an original work? Do you know how many people on this board dream of just that?


----------



## timpeac

Moreover - the owners of lyrics have been getting really weird lately. A year or two ago you could always find the lyrics to any song you wanted. Now, I find every so often that major lyric posting sites have some songs "removed at the request of the artist". I'm sure that they wouldn't remove them out of the goodness of their heart, but just because they thought there may be some legal implication. It goes to show that some lyrics owners are not the forgiving types on what their lyrics may be being used for - and might be unlikely to accept the answer "this new translation is a separate work of art".


----------



## ElaineG

> *Derivative works, also known as “new versions,” include such works as translations*, musical arrangements, dramatizations, fictionalizations, art reproductions, and condensations.


 


> *WHO MAY PREPARE A DERIVATIVE WORK?*
> 
> Only the owner of copyright in a work has the right to prepare, or to authorize someone else to create, a new version of that work. The owner is generally the author or someone who has obtained rights from the author.


http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ14.html

(Emphasis added).


----------



## justin

I hardly think that you can describe Robert FitzGerald's translation of Omar Khayyam as derivative. Who remembers the original? Do you? Does anybody, save speakers of Farsi? Would you also forbid comedians from doing impressions of celebrities? Where does all of this end?


----------



## cuchuflete

Please just spend a little time enjoying section 106 of US copyright law.  It will tell you most of what you don't want to know.  

We don't want to forbid comedians anything. We simply want to comply with the law.  There are lots of web sites where you can join others in sharing the view that the law is no good, but it's what we are required to work with.


----------



## maxiogee

timpeac said:
			
		

> Moreover - the owners of lyrics have been getting really weird lately.



A well-known Irish artist has a new live album out.
He covers many people's songs as well as writing some of Ireland's best known popular ballads.
In the introduction to one of his songs he described how he heard it being sung by someone else.
Then he does an aside saying in effect "Stop writing to me asking for the words to my songs. If you want them, do what everyone else does and buy the disc. Then play it over and over, piece by piece, and write them down."
Fair play to him.
However, he might have failed to remember that on another of his albums he mentions hearing someone singing a song and he said he approached them and asked "Give us that oul song there" - in other words he was asking for the words!


----------



## ElaineG

justin said:
			
		

> I hardly think that you can describe Robert FitzGerald's translation of Omar Khayyam as derivative. Who remembers the original? Do you? Does anybody, save speakers of Farsi? Would you also forbid comedians from doing impressions of celebrities? Where does all of this end?


 
Omar Khayyam is in the public domain.  Comedians doing impressions of celebrities are protected by the parody doctrine.

I suggest if these issues interest you, you research and read more about intellectual property law.

None of this is the idea of anyone at this forum.  It is a thoroughly established body of law, codified in the United States Code and international agreements.

Intellectual property legal scholars spend years debating the questions that you raise -- as do judges and lawyers.  You may find the subject interesting, or not...

However, the fact remains that deliberate infringement of copyright is a crime, and even innocent infringement can be subject to a civil suit at which the author can get statutory penalties without proving damages.

This are my opinions as an educated forera/moderator and do not, of course, constitute legal advice!  

The Internet has many many many great websites on intellectual property law.  If you are interested, I'll post some later.


----------

