From pycyn@aol.com Wed Jul 10 11:09:48 2002 Return-Path: X-Sender: Pycyn@aol.com X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_0_7_4); 10 Jul 2002 18:09:48 -0000 Received: (qmail 80141 invoked from network); 10 Jul 2002 18:09:47 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.216) by m15.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 10 Jul 2002 18:09:47 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO imo-d05.mx.aol.com) (205.188.157.37) by mta1.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 10 Jul 2002 18:09:47 -0000 Received: from Pycyn@aol.com by imo-d05.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v32.21.) id r.d0.29c05aad (26117) for ; Wed, 10 Jul 2002 14:09:08 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2002 14:09:08 EDT Subject: Re: [lojban] Comments on a bit of translation... To: lojban@yahoogroups.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_d0.29c05aad.2a5dd244_boundary" X-Mailer: AOL 7.0 for Windows US sub 10509 From: pycyn@aol.com X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=2455001 X-Yahoo-Profile: kaliputra --part1_d0.29c05aad.2a5dd244_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 7/10/2002 11:15:04 AM Central Daylight Time, lojban-out@lojban.org writes: << > You have no legal liability here. You could, in fact, further protect > yourself by being the one to point out this copyright violation to > Nintendo. Their contact information for this is: > >> I know I don't, but at least one recent case has held that the owner of a list is responsible in the case of repeated violations. It has been stayed pending appeal, but sets a precedent for now. So, Logical Language Group might be liable, which taxes all of us in one way or another. I rather resent the implication that I am a fink. (Is this another case of your thinking that my efforts to be helpful are covert attacks? See someone about paranoia.) << Asking "How is this correctly translated?" (the only thing he is doing) would surely fall under the "fair use for academic purposes" clause. >> That should be OK, but he started off with a continous and informative stretch of text and that is, apparently, at lest some times and to some extent a no-no (and has been since the days of ditto machines). It is unclear where the lines are (no, it is clear there are no lines but how far the fuzzy area extends). Less than a sentence is safely short, a whole chapter is clearly too long. And the purposes also vary the size of the grey -- translations seem to ahve more latitude than some things, less than critical studies. << Recall, by the way: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/lojban/message/7489 >> Very true, but much has changed in the last year. Even Esperanto has apaprently pulled in its troops a bit (but they almost always asked anyhow, they say). --part1_d0.29c05aad.2a5dd244_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 7/10/2002 11:15:04 AM Central Daylight Time, lojban-out@lojban.org writes:

<<

You have no legal liability here. You could, in fact, further protect
yourself by being the one to point out this copyright violation to
Nintendo. Their contact information for this is:

>>

I know I don't, but at least one recent case has held that the owner of a list is responsible in the case of repeated violations. It has been stayed pending appeal, but sets a precedent for now. So, Logical Language Group might be liable, which taxes all of us in one way or another.
I rather resent the implication that I am a fink. (Is this another case of your thinking that my efforts to be helpful are covert attacks? See someone about paranoia.)

<<
Asking "How is this correctly translated?" (the only thing
he is doing) would surely fall under the "fair use for academic purposes"
clause.
>>

That should be OK, but he started off with a continous and informative stretch of text and that is, apparently, at lest some times and to some extent a no-no (and has been since the days of ditto machines). It is unclear where the lines are (no, it is clear there are no lines but how far the fuzzy area extends). Less than a sentence is safely short, a whole chapter is clearly too long. And the purposes also vary the size of the grey -- translations seem to ahve more latitude than some things, less than critical studies.

<<
Recall, by the way:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/lojban/message/7489
>>

Very true, but much has changed in the last year. Even Esperanto has apaprently pulled in its troops a bit (but they almost always asked anyhow, they say).

--part1_d0.29c05aad.2a5dd244_boundary--