From: "Aurelia J. Schultz" <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Thu, 21 Nov 2013 13:42:51 -0600

Hi Sandy,

I'll give an opinion here, though as is typical with attorney opinions
that are not legal advice it may not be as helpful as you'd hoped.

That particular provision of CC-BY that Klaus cited under (i), Section
4(c), is in the licenses in order to address moral rights. In some
countries, any adaptation can be considered to violate moral rights,
hence the specific listing of Japan in the license.  But in other
countries, like the United States, there are no moral rights.  So I
would suggest that whether or not a bad translation of a CC-BY work
violates section 4(c) of the license depends on whether or not the
translation is "prejudicial to the Original Author's honor or
reputation" under the laws of the country where the license is being
enforced.

In the US, a bad translation should not violate the license.  In other
countries with strong traditions of protecting authors' honor, maybe
it would.

Aurelia

Aurelia J. Schultz, Attorney at Law
California | Wisconsin
Skype: aurelia.schultz
Afro-IP <http://afro-ip.blogspot.com>
Book an appointment: https://my.vcita.com/6e04f97d/scheduler


> Date: Tue, 19 Nov 2013 17:53:19 -0500
> From: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Copyright: business or moral right?
> To: [log in to unmask]
>
> From: Sandy Thatcher <[log in to unmask]>
> Date: Mon, 18 Nov 2013 19:38:02 -0600
>
> I'm well aware of the proviso of the CC-BY license Klaus cites under
> (i). But I interpret that to mean, as it would in libel law, "actual
> malice," viz., intentional distortion, mutilation, modification, etc.
> I do not believe it would invalidate the license if simply a poor
> translation is prepared with good intentions. Is there any lawyer on
> this list who would care to express an opinion here?
>
> Sandy Thatcher
>
>
> > From: Klaus Graf <[log in to unmask]>
> > Date: Mon, 18 Nov 2013 14:13:05 +0100
> >
> > Yes and I can envision the day when 2+2=5.
> >
> > As I wrote recently in a German piece on CC-BY:
> >
> > http://redaktionsblog.hypotheses.org/1769
> >
> > the debate agianst CC-BY is a phantom debate arguing with possible
> > disadvantages while in fact all authors of hundred thousands of
> > articles under CC-BY are content with it.
> >
> > Mr. Thatcher cannot prevent poor translations of hic one opinion pice at:
> >
> > http://www.jlsc-pub.org/jlsc/vol1/iss1/5/
> >
> > which has a no-commercial restriction, not a no-derivs restriction: CC-BY-NC.
> >
> > I will make three things clear he ignores:
> >
> > (i) I have to quote the legal code at
> >
> > http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/legalcode
> >
> > " If You create an Adaptation, upon notice from any Licensor You must,
> > to the extent practicable, remove from the Adaptation any credit as
> > required by Section 4(b), as requested."
> >
> > This means nothing else than as ultima ratio an author can withdraw his name.
> >
> > And further: "Except as otherwise agreed in writing by the Licensor or
> > as may be otherwise permitted by applicable law, if You Reproduce,
> > Distribute or Publicly Perform the Work either by itself or as part of
> > any Adaptations or Collections, You must not distort, mutilate, modify
> > or take other derogatory action in relation to the Work which would be
> > prejudicial to the Original Author's honor or reputation."
> >
> > If a poor translation damages the author's honor or reputation the
> > license isn't valid.
> >
> > (ii) It is possible to exercise moral rights of the copyright beside
> > the license, e.g. to sue against the distortion of the copyrighted
> > item.
> >
> > (iii) CC-BY doesn't suspend the rules and practices against scholarly
> > misconduct, e.g. ethic codes.
> >
> > If a translation is poor - make a better one!
> >
> > Klaus Graf