the translation of the content
Hello! I want to translate some materials of this site and post on my website. The authors of this site will not mind? Thank you!
Every page on this site has
at the bottom. You would need to talk to the owners of the site.
If it is the C++ reference that interests you, cppreference.com (it is a wiki, ergo of palpably superior quality) allows free use of its content.
A translation in the language of interest may be already available:
See 'In other languages' at the bottom of this page: http://en.cppreference.com/w/
| © cplusplus.com, 2000-2016 - All rights reserved |
If it is the C++ reference that interests you, cppreference.com (it is a wiki, ergo of palpably superior quality) allows free use of its content.
| What can I do with the material on this site? The content is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-Sharealike 3.0 Unported License (CC-BY-SA) and by the GNU Free Documentation License (GFDL) (unversioned, with no invariant sections, front-cover texts, or back-cover texts). That means that you can use this site in almost any way you like, including mirroring, copying, translating, etc. All we would ask is to provide link back to cppreference.com so that people know where to get the most up-to-date content. In addition to that, any modified content should be released under a equivalent license so that everyone could benefit from the modified versions. http://en.cppreference.com/w/Cppreference:FAQ |
A translation in the language of interest may be already available:
See 'In other languages' at the bottom of this page: http://en.cppreference.com/w/
| See 'In other languages' at the bottom of this page: http://en.cppreference.com/w/ |
To be fair, their usefulness is debated here http://en.cppreference.com/w/Talk:Main_Page#Usefulness_of_translated_sites -- possibly because too few people feel the need to translate and maintan translations.
Last edited on
Thank you! I am interested in the tutorial "C ++ Language". I did not find a translation, so I want to translate itself. I certainly will place on my site links to the original source.
There's a contact link below the copyright notice at the bottom that you might be able to use to contact the owners before you do the translation.
© cplusplus.com, 2000-2016 - All rights reserved - v3.1
Spotted an error? contact us
© cplusplus.com, 2000-2016 - All rights reserved - v3.1
Spotted an error? contact us
As others have pointed out, the contents of the site are protected by copyright. If you wish to publish a translation then, legally, you must obtain the permission of the copyright holder - that is, the owner of this site (I presume).
Well, until you get permission from them, then it would be illegal to publish your translation of the tutorial. No answer = no permission, sadly.
Perhaps you could offer to translate the tutorial for publication on this site, rather than your own?
Perhaps you could offer to translate the tutorial for publication on this site, rather than your own?
I might be mistaken but isn't this covered under fair use, since the content is being transformed and there is no profit being made here?
> I could offer my translation if they will respond to my messages :)
Send them a reminder, wait for a few days, and if there is still no reply, just go ahead and use it.
That should give you more than adequate defence under fair use.
Send them a reminder, wait for a few days, and if there is still no reply, just go ahead and use it.
That should give you more than adequate defence under fair use.
"Fair use" is one of those terms that gets thrown around a lot by people who don't seem to know what it actually means.
In the context of copyright law, the "fair use" doctrine allows you to take small excerpts of a work, for the purposes of reporting, commenting, criticism, research or parodying it.
It has nothing to do with whether or not a profit is being made. Copyright is about the right to copy, not the right to make a profit.
It has nothing to do with whether the work has been translated (a translation is considered a derivative work legally, which copyright protects against).
It has nothing to do with whether or not the owner of the work has taken more than a few days to respond to a request for permission to copy.
It has nothing to do with whether you personally think it would be a helpful thing to do to republish the work somewhere else, or whether a bunch of other people on the Internet think it would be helpful.
There's loads of information about this stuff out there, only a Google search away, for those who are actually interested in the facts.
To the OP: The admin of this site is notoriously "hands-off", and has often been very slow to respond to messages (as we've discussed in threads here in the Lounge before). Don't be surprised it it takes them a long time to answer. Don't be surprised if you never get an answer at all. It's just the way the admin chooses to run the site.
I think it would be great to have translations of the tutorial, and I think it's very generous of you to offer to put in the work to do it. I hope you do get that permission, as I'm sure it would be of benefit to many people. Sadly, until you do get that permission, publishing your translation elsewhere would be a breach of copyright.
In the context of copyright law, the "fair use" doctrine allows you to take small excerpts of a work, for the purposes of reporting, commenting, criticism, research or parodying it.
It has nothing to do with whether or not a profit is being made. Copyright is about the right to copy, not the right to make a profit.
It has nothing to do with whether the work has been translated (a translation is considered a derivative work legally, which copyright protects against).
It has nothing to do with whether or not the owner of the work has taken more than a few days to respond to a request for permission to copy.
It has nothing to do with whether you personally think it would be a helpful thing to do to republish the work somewhere else, or whether a bunch of other people on the Internet think it would be helpful.
There's loads of information about this stuff out there, only a Google search away, for those who are actually interested in the facts.
To the OP: The admin of this site is notoriously "hands-off", and has often been very slow to respond to messages (as we've discussed in threads here in the Lounge before). Don't be surprised it it takes them a long time to answer. Don't be surprised if you never get an answer at all. It's just the way the admin chooses to run the site.
I think it would be great to have translations of the tutorial, and I think it's very generous of you to offer to put in the work to do it. I hope you do get that permission, as I'm sure it would be of benefit to many people. Sadly, until you do get that permission, publishing your translation elsewhere would be a breach of copyright.
Last edited on
All this is really sadly. I'll wait for a reply from the owners. Thanks for answers!
In the context of copyright law, the "fair use" doctrine allows you to take small excerpts of a work, for the purposes of reporting, commenting, criticism, research or parodying it. |
I'm not sure where you're getting "small excerpts" from or why you're italicizing them.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/107
It has everything to do with whether or not a profit is being made on the product.
It also matters if the work is transformative such as in the case of Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music Inc : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Campbell_v._Acuff-Rose_Music,_Inc.
Last edited on
If you're really keen on doing this, consider sending a letter via snail mail (post). Or phone.
Try the address found here:
https://whois.icann.org/en/lookup?name=cplusplus.com
Try the address found here:
https://whois.icann.org/en/lookup?name=cplusplus.com
Last edited on
closed account (1vRz3TCk)
| NoXzema wrote: |
|---|
| I'm not sure where you're getting "small excerpts" from or why you're italicizing them. |
Here is guidance to copyright exception in the UK...It talks about limited extracts.
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/exceptions-to-copyright
plastictown, let us know how you get on talking to the owner, I've given up trying.
| 'm not sure where you're getting "small excerpts" from or why you're italicizing them. https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/107 |
| Legal Information Institute wrote: |
|---|
| the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole |
is saying that it matters how much of a work you reproduce, and how significant that part of what you reproduce is. My understanding from talking to lawyers is that small excerpts are OK, and that reproducing an entire work is almost never OK.
And I italicized it because it seemed important to emphasize. If you feel differently, I strongly encourage you to not italicize them when you use the words in your own posts :)
| It has everything to do with whether or not a profit is being made on the product. |
Fair point on the profit thing - it looks as though that is one of the factors that weighs into consideration when deciding if something is fair use. Although note that no one of these criteria in itself is enough to denote something as "fair use". A work that doesn't violate the doctrine on the matter of profit, can still fail on any of the other criteria. So "everything to do with whether or not a profit is being made" is overstating things - that's merely one of the things it has to do with.
| It also matters if the work is transformative such as in the case of Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music Inc : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Campbell_v._Acuff-Rose_Music,_Inc. |
Indeed - where "transformative" is usually taken to mean for the purposes of parody, comment, criticism, etc. In other words, the work that quotes from the original must have a different purpose from the original.
(Note that the case that you link to is one of parody, which is definitely transformative.)
I've never heard of simple translation to another language being enough to make a work "transformative"; certainly, in this case, the use of the translated work will be exactly the same as the original, which would suggest not. The Wiki article on the subject certainly doesn't mention it at all:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transformation_(law)
If there are sources out there that do cite translation as being sufficient to denote a work as transformative, I'd be very interested to read them.
I'd also note that, if the OP - or anyone else - really wants an authoritative answer as to whether something they want to do is legal, they should consult a lawyer, rather than a bunch of eejits talking about it on the Intarwebs ;)
Last edited on
In my translation on each page the first line is the message that this text is the translation of the original text, besides in the text there is a great number of references to a source. Perhaps, it can help with the solution of a question.
Topic archived. No new replies allowed.