Private Translation of Japanese Language Book - Copyright

[pumpkinpies]

I live live in U.S.

I purchased a Japanese language biography from Japan, which is about the size our small paperbacks. A couple phrases are in English.

I do not read Japanese, but would like the information within it for researching historical documents I have discovered in regards to the individual discussed within the bio. This is a famous person in Japan who was born in the 1840s and dies in the 1930s.

There is no English version of the book.

Can I hire a 3rd party to translate the volume for me into English? This is for personal use only and will not be released or published.

 

[quincy]

I live live in U.S.

I purchased a Japanese language biography from Japan, which is about the size our small paperbacks. A couple phrases are in English.

I do not read Japanese, but would like the information within it for researching historical documents I have discovered in regards to the individual discussed within the bio. This is a famous person in Japan who was born in the 1840s and dies in the 1930s.

There is no English version of the book.

Can I hire a 3rd party to translate the volume for me into English? This is for personal use only and will not be released or published.

You can hire someone to translate the book for you from Japanese to English so you can understand the text and benefit from its contents. The text itself, if published prior to 1923, would be in the public domain in the US and, if 50 years have passed since the Japanese author's death, also copyright-free in Japan.

 

[pumpkinpies]

You can hire someone to translate the book for you from Japanese to English so you can understand the text and benefit from its contents. The text itself, if published prior to 1923, would be in the public domain in the US and, if 50 years have passed since the Japanese author's death, also copyright-free in Japan.

Thank you for the information. The book is a modern Japanese paperback thus would still be under copyright.

 

[quincy]

Thank you for the information. The book is a modern Japanese paperback thus would still be under copyright.

In that case, it is best to get permission from the copyright holder to translate the book from Japanese text to English text.

Translations of copyrighted works are considered derivative works and creating derivatives is a right that is exclusive to the copyright owner.

Now, if you want to hire a translator to READ the book to you, that is not a problem.

 

[LdiJ]

In that case, it is best to get permission from the copyright holder to translate the book from Japanese text to English text.

Translations of copyrighted works are considered derivative works and creating derivatives is a right that is exclusive to the copyright owner.

Now, if you want to hire a translator to READ the book to you, that is not a problem.

I completely disagree with you. It is not a violation of copyright to translate a book for one's own personal use...in fact, its not a violation of copyright to do anything with a written work that clearly is for your own personal use, even if its derivative.

Plus, is clear that you do not speak another language, or you would realize that reading aloud, translating in your head, and then saying it to another person in a different language is not a simple thing to do. The highly trained translators at the UN could perhaps do it with some accuracy, but they are used to doing it with the spoken rather than the written word. An ordinary translator would stumble with it...it would be disjointed and not have a flow that would allow it to be truly listenable.

I think that it would be particularly difficult with a translation from an Asian language to English, as the structure is so very different.

 

[quincy]

I completely disagree with you. It is not a violation of copyright to translate a book for one's own personal use...in fact, its not a violation of copyright to do anything with a written work that clearly is for your own personal use, even if its derivative.

What law are you referencing, LdiJ? I will wait for you to post your LEGAL support for your statements quoted above (but I will pack a bag and a toothbrush because I think the wait will be a long one).

Plus, is clear that you do not speak another language, or you would realize that reading aloud, translating in your head, and then saying it to another person in a different language is not a simple thing to do. The highly trained translators at the UN could perhaps do it with some accuracy, but they are used to doing it with the spoken rather than the written word. An ordinary translator would stumble with it...it would be disjointed and not have a flow that would allow it to be truly listenable.

I think that it would be particularly difficult with a translation from an Asian language to English, as the structure is so very different.

I speak and read both Spanish and French fluently and I am not a highly trained translator at the UN. If one knows a language well, it is not difficult to read it.

 

[justalayman]

While it isn't really relevant to the question, I believe what Ldij was saying about having a person read the book aloud translating from the person reading it in its original language to speaking it for the listener may not be easy or pleasurable. The act is translating can require reading an entire sentence before determining the most correct English translation. Otherwise simply converting it from the foreign language to english can end up with nonsensical statements.

It might come across a bit like the ASL translators that were used for the recent press conferences by floridas governmental leaders.

 

[quincy]

While it isn't really relevant to the question, I believe what Ldij was saying about having a person read the book aloud translating from the person reading it in its original language to speaking it for the listener may not be easy or pleasurable. The act is translating can require reading an entire sentence before determining the most correct English translation. Otherwise simply converting it from the foreign language to english can end up with nonsensical statements.

It might come across a bit like the ASL translators that were used for the recent press conferences by floridas governmental leaders.

I can understand that. It depends on the translator how easily a foreign text can be read aloud in English.

But I really question LdiJ's other statements and would LOVE to see if she has any LEGAL support for them (and by "lega support" I don't mean a story about a person she knows).

I think LdiJ is confusing the possibility of getting caught with the legality of doing something.

 

[justalayman]

I can understand that. It depends on the translator how easily a foreign text can be read aloud in English.

But I really question LdiJ's other statements and would LOVE to see if she has any LEGAL support for them (and by "lega support" I don't mean a story about a person she knows).

I think LdiJ is confusing the possibility of getting caught with the legality of doing something.

...and I'm sure you took note of the fact I offered no support for that part of her contestation. If not, please take note I offered no support for the other part of her contestation.

 

[quincy]

...and I'm sure you took note of the fact I offered no support for that part of her contestation. If not, please take note I offered no support for the other part of her contestation.

Haha. It is so noted.

 

[LdiJ]

What law are you referencing, LdiJ? I will wait for you to post your LEGAL support for your statements quoted above (but I will pack a bag and a toothbrush because I think the wait will be a long one).

The subject has been discussed extensively on these forums. It is the Doctrine of First Sale. A person who buys a copyrighted item has the right to do whatever they want to do with that particular item.

For example, if I buy a book about all of the Disney Princesses, and I use it to cut out all of the pictures and some of the words, glue and shellac them and turn them into a mobile over my child's bed, that is perfectly legal because it was derived from the exact copy that I owned and is being used by me.

Translating the book in question would only be illegal if the OP turned around and provided that translation to someone else for their use, either for free or for sale.

I speak and read both Spanish and French fluently and I am not a highly trained translator at the UN. If one knows a language well, it is not difficult to read it.

It is extremely SIMPLE to read in other languages if you know them. In fact, its often easier to read in those languages than to speak the languages. I speak Spanish and Italian but I can also read in French even though I cannot speak it fluently. That is not what I am talking about. What I am talking about is reading in Spanish, (for example) but verbalizing what I have read in English, with any kind of flow that makes it enjoyable to listen. In the best case scenario you are going to have a pause between each sentence while you restructure the sentence in your head to verbalize it in English.

 

[CTU]

*makes popcorn*

 

[quincy]

The subject has been discussed extensively on these forums. It is the Doctrine of First Sale. A person who buys a copyrighted item has the right to do whatever they want to do with that particular item.

Have you actually READ what has been posted on this forum about the first sale doctrine? I suspect not. NOWHERE does the first sale doctrine allow for an owner of a copyrighted work "to do whatever they want to do with that particular item."

Pull out one of your legally purchased DVDs. Play it. What is the first thing you see on the screen?

For example, if I buy a book about all of the Disney Princesses, and I use it to cut out all of the pictures and some of the words, glue and shellac them and turn them into a mobile over my child's bed, that is perfectly legal because it was derived from the exact copy that I owned and is being used by me.

Please cite where in the Copyright Act (or in any other law) that it allows you to do this.

I can think only of a possible defense.

Translating the book in question would only be illegal if the OP turned around and provided that translation to someone else for their use, either for free or for sale.

And your legal support for this is what?

It is extremely SIMPLE to read in other languages if you know them. In fact, its often easier to read in those languages than to speak the languages. I speak Spanish and Italian but I can also read in French even though I cannot speak it fluently. That is not what I am talking about. What I am talking about is reading in Spanish, (for example) but verbalizing what I have read in English, with any kind of flow that makes it enjoyable to listen. In the best case scenario you are going to have a pause between each sentence while you restructure the sentence in your head to verbalize it in English.

So ... you are saying that an oral translation of a foreign work is not possible because of, um, pauses?

I don't know what to tell you. The first sale doctrine allows for the purchaser of a legal copy of a copyrighted work to do what they want with the copy AS LONG AS THE COPYRIGHT OWNER'S EXCLUSIVE RIGHTS ARE NOT INFRINGED.

Exclusive rights held by a copyright holder include the EXCLUSIVE right to reproduce the work, display or perform the work, distribute the work, PREPARE ADAPTATIONS (DERIVATIVES) OF THE WORK.

A translation of a copyrighted work is a derivative work and creating derivatives is an exclusive right held by the copyright holder.

 

[LdiJ]

Have you actually READ what has been posted on this forum about the first sale doctrine? I suspect not. NOWHERE does the first sale doctrine allow for an owner of a copyrighted work "to do whatever they want to do with that particular item."

Pull out one of your legally purchased DVDs. Play it. What is the first thing you see on the screen?



Please cite where in the Copyright Act (or in any other law) that it allows you to do this.

I can think only of a possible defense.



And your legal support for this is what?



So ... you are saying that an oral translation of a foreign work is not possible because of, um, pauses?

You know exactly what I am saying and are simply being a jerk to be a jerk.

I don't know what to tell you. The first sale doctrine allows for the purchaser of a legal copy of a copyrighted work to do what they want with the copy AS LONG AS THE COPYRIGHT OWNER'S EXCLUSIVE RIGHTS ARE NOT INFRINGED.

Exclusive rights held by a copyright holder include the EXCLUSIVE right to reproduce the work, display or perform the work, distribute the work, PREPARE ADAPTATIONS (DERIVATIVES) OF THE WORK.

A translation of a copyrighted work is a derivative work and creating derivatives is an exclusive right held by the copyright holder.

You might want to review this:

The first sale doctrine, codified at 17 U.S.C. § 109, provides that an individual who knowingly purchases a copy of a copyrighted work from the copyright holder receives the right to sell, display or otherwise dispose of that particular copy, notwithstanding the interests of the copyright owner.

Linked from here: https://www.justice.gov/usam/criminal-resource-manual-1854-copyright-infringement-first-sale-doctrine

Since this is from the US Attorney's website I think its a credible quote.

Please prove to me exactly where in the law it states, or where in case law it states that an owner of a copy of a book may not have that copy translated for their own personal use? Since they have the right to sell the copy, display the copy or otherwise dispose of the copy you are going to have to prove it.

 

[quincy]

You know exactly what I am saying and are simply being a jerk to be a jerk.

Asking you to support what you say is not being a jerk. Calling someone a jerk IS being a jerk.

You might want to review this:

Linked from here: https://www.justice.gov/usam/criminal-resource-manual-1854-copyright-infringement-first-sale-doctrine

Since this is from the US Attorney's website I think its a credible quote.

Do you understand what you quoted? Where in what you quoted does it say you can copy a copyrighted work or create derivatives of the copyrighted work?

When you legally purchase a legal copy of a copyrighted work, you can sell that work, or give it away, or (in the case of artwork) hang it on your wall, or you can toss the copyrighted work in the trash. All of this is permissible under the first sale doctrine.

However, you CANNOT exercise the rights EXCLUSIVE to the copyright holder because ... these rights are EXCLUSIVE to the copyright holder.

Please prove to me exactly where in the law it states, or where in case law it states that an owner of a copy of a book may not have that copy translated for their own personal use? Since they have the right to sell the copy, display the copy or otherwise dispose of the copy you are going to have to prove it.

You are not purposely being obtuse, are you?

From the Copyright Act, scroll to section 106, exclusive rights, and section 107 et seq, limitations on rights (or perhaps read everything ): https://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html

Definition of "exclusive:" Given or belonging to no other; not shared or divided; excluding all but what is specified.

Creating derivatives is an EXCLUSIVE right of a copyright holder.

Now, I mentioned in an earlier post a possible "defense" to copyright infringement.

One defense is FAIR USE. Fair use is NOT permission to exercise a copyright holder's exclusive right. It is a defense to infringing on a copyright holder's exclusive rights. If a copyright holder objects to the unauthorized use of their copyrighted work and sues the infringer over this unauthorized use, the infringer can argue, "yes, I infringed but it is an excusable infringement." There are factors a court will look at to determine if the defense defeats the claim.