|
On May 30 2011 02:54 QuickStriker wrote:Show nested quote +On May 30 2011 02:49 supernovamaniac wrote:On May 30 2011 02:45 QuickStriker wrote:On May 30 2011 02:40 supernovamaniac wrote:On May 30 2011 02:33 QuickStriker wrote:On May 30 2011 02:27 supernovamaniac wrote:
"Examples of fair use include commentary, criticism, news reporting, research, teaching, library archiving and scholarship."
What's the exact definition of news reporting in this case? Lol, just when I was about to reply I noticed the quick ninja edit. :D Now in terms of news reporting, don't you think the comments or the side personal words of the OP (or the translator) count as news reporting? Sure we're using footage of another but it's not all 100% direct footage since we have even that 1% of news reporting. And in my view, the side commentaries that OP make in beginning or end of translations or news threads and even those small " Translation Notes" that TL translators often do can definitely count as news reporting or at least " commentary" as well as " criticism" which is also ok in "fair use". To the first bolded statement: Yes, but the news reporting would only count towards the side comments/personal words, not the translations itself. It's like saying I took Epik High's song and added 2 beats at the end that I have created, thus resulting in a new work. In terms of criticism, they are posted along the translated content. But however, they only take the segment of the interviews/translations in order to do so. They don't copy the whole thing and then start making the comment; most people only take sections of the video/news/etc. to criticize. For example, Stephen Colbert didn't need the whole segment of the news footage from CNN to report that Bin Laden loved Nestle and Coke/Pepsi. Sure, the commentaries and news reporting (side comments) fall under fair use. The translations, however, is in the gray area. And according to fomos, it does not fall under fair use. In my opinion, this is all in the gray area like you said. Maybe because I never seen such unique case here nor heard of it in my mass media law or other law classes I've taken but, fair use can be taken in many different meanings and it's common practice for corporations and companies in US to take advantage of such loopholes they find or possibly something here until the fullest extent and be ok with it until the US Supreme Court or US law changes. What's to say TL can't follow what others do? And in terms of fomos, I don't think they (Fomos) know US law nor know the whole idea of "fair use". Again I'm not 100% sure or right but seeing a Korean company In Korea know US law much more so than Korean law isn't common since they'll try to take it to only their nation's law. Except the conflict takes place in US now so US law endures. Remember: This always depends on the country they take the legal action in. In this case, it might be where TL server is located (which is not US). But I don't see any legal action happening over this "small" case. On May 30 2011 02:48 Artimo wrote:
I thought it was fine as long as you cite the source of your work.
i am not an expert on copyright laws and pagiarism but i honestly always thought you can do this as long as you say where the source is from etc.
this would mean that much of the literature work you do at school is subject to the same copyright laws which doesnt seem right. What do you mean by 'literature work' in school? I definitely checked just now and TL server is in US including its IP. As for legal action, even if it's Korea to US, it's by the defendant area than the plaintiff no? Blizzard vs OGN/MBC/Kespa certainly took place in Korea but here, it's Fomos to TL (Korea -> US)
I'm too stupid when it comes to lawsuit shit, consult your local lawyers. (You're probably right though)
|
Well it sucks for us I guess but it makes sense if they want to do their own english website 
Shouldn't bash them really they want visitors aswell.
|
On May 30 2011 02:57 supernovamaniac wrote:Show nested quote +On May 30 2011 02:54 QuickStriker wrote:On May 30 2011 02:49 supernovamaniac wrote:On May 30 2011 02:45 QuickStriker wrote:On May 30 2011 02:40 supernovamaniac wrote:On May 30 2011 02:33 QuickStriker wrote:On May 30 2011 02:27 supernovamaniac wrote:
"Examples of fair use include commentary, criticism, news reporting, research, teaching, library archiving and scholarship."
What's the exact definition of news reporting in this case? Lol, just when I was about to reply I noticed the quick ninja edit. :D Now in terms of news reporting, don't you think the comments or the side personal words of the OP (or the translator) count as news reporting? Sure we're using footage of another but it's not all 100% direct footage since we have even that 1% of news reporting. And in my view, the side commentaries that OP make in beginning or end of translations or news threads and even those small " Translation Notes" that TL translators often do can definitely count as news reporting or at least " commentary" as well as " criticism" which is also ok in "fair use". To the first bolded statement: Yes, but the news reporting would only count towards the side comments/personal words, not the translations itself. It's like saying I took Epik High's song and added 2 beats at the end that I have created, thus resulting in a new work. In terms of criticism, they are posted along the translated content. But however, they only take the segment of the interviews/translations in order to do so. They don't copy the whole thing and then start making the comment; most people only take sections of the video/news/etc. to criticize. For example, Stephen Colbert didn't need the whole segment of the news footage from CNN to report that Bin Laden loved Nestle and Coke/Pepsi. Sure, the commentaries and news reporting (side comments) fall under fair use. The translations, however, is in the gray area. And according to fomos, it does not fall under fair use. In my opinion, this is all in the gray area like you said. Maybe because I never seen such unique case here nor heard of it in my mass media law or other law classes I've taken but, fair use can be taken in many different meanings and it's common practice for corporations and companies in US to take advantage of such loopholes they find or possibly something here until the fullest extent and be ok with it until the US Supreme Court or US law changes. What's to say TL can't follow what others do? And in terms of fomos, I don't think they (Fomos) know US law nor know the whole idea of "fair use". Again I'm not 100% sure or right but seeing a Korean company In Korea know US law much more so than Korean law isn't common since they'll try to take it to only their nation's law. Except the conflict takes place in US now so US law endures. Remember: This always depends on the country they take the legal action in. In this case, it might be where TL server is located (which is not US). But I don't see any legal action happening over this "small" case. On May 30 2011 02:48 Artimo wrote:
I thought it was fine as long as you cite the source of your work.
i am not an expert on copyright laws and pagiarism but i honestly always thought you can do this as long as you say where the source is from etc.
this would mean that much of the literature work you do at school is subject to the same copyright laws which doesnt seem right. What do you mean by 'literature work' in school? I definitely checked just now and TL server is in US including its IP. As for legal action, even if it's Korea to US, it's by the defendant area than the plaintiff no? Blizzard vs OGN/MBC/Kespa certainly took place in Korea but here, it's Fomos to TL (Korea -> US) I'm too stupid when it comes to lawsuit shit, consult your local lawyers. (You're probably right though)
But the whole difference between a typical case between two parties and this particular gray area case is this conflict all takes place on the internet. Internet is still a very vague gray area, especially when it comes down to law cases and enforcing the law. Blizzard vs Kespa took place directly person to person because the main conflict was in TV and other things. But Internet has such a huge gray area that maybe what we're saying can be all irrelevant because enforcement is harder for Internet. But that's not also saying either are absolutely correct, just saying there may be LOOPHOLES here because the conflict occurs on the Internet.
|
Why can't we just work with DES? Their interviews are way better.
Very frustrating that Fomos screwed up first, then are claiming to protect a half-assed english implementation - half the website is in korean, the layout is very poor, the translations are awful. But move on folks.
|
When I read this I just thought ... sigh
My mind is too tired of this shit to even care anymore
|
TL.net should like many have said, strike a deal with DES. That we can provide english translations for articles and etc. Then we can look back at Fomos and laugh in their faces!
|
On May 30 2011 03:14 Xiphos wrote:
TL.net should like many have said, strike a deal with DES. That we can provide english translations for articles and etc. Then we can look back at Fomos and laugh in their faces!
Or we should have our own writing/reporting staff and have our own original interviews and articles, exclusively from TL.net. Then we can truly call our site, Starcraft Progaming News. :D
And of course, laugh at Fomos afterwards while we're at it! 
|
On May 30 2011 03:23 QuickStriker wrote:Show nested quote +On May 30 2011 03:14 Xiphos wrote:
TL.net should like many have said, strike a deal with DES. That we can provide english translations for articles and etc. Then we can look back at Fomos and laugh in their faces! Or we should have our own writing/reporting staff and have our own original interviews and articles, exclusively from TL.net. Then we can truly call our site, Starcraft Progaming News. :D
Great idea. Let's pay someone to go to Korea and let them stay there for interviews/other stuff only.
Oh wait, those were things in the past T.T
|
On May 30 2011 03:24 supernovamaniac wrote:Show nested quote +On May 30 2011 03:23 QuickStriker wrote:On May 30 2011 03:14 Xiphos wrote:
TL.net should like many have said, strike a deal with DES. That we can provide english translations for articles and etc. Then we can look back at Fomos and laugh in their faces! Or we should have our own writing/reporting staff and have our own original interviews and articles, exclusively from TL.net. Then we can truly call our site, Starcraft Progaming News. :D Great idea. Let's pay someone to go to Korea and let them stay there for interviews/other stuff only. Oh wait, those were things in the past T.T
Sarcasm..
|
Meh, what a failwhale :/
If all the previous articles are removed...
There isn't even a proper reason why either :T
|
Aaah greed and selfish interests.. Now you cant even translate aticles anymore ...
lolololol
-.-
|
|
|
Czech Republic129 Posts
I find this rather sad. Although understandable, not a great way of promoting BW which should come first IMO. Both sides could flourish, instead we get a large number of upset people, that won't go over anyway.
|
One thing I don't understand about this mess is how FOMOS has exclusive rights to interviews? These interviews are broadcast on a television network-- right? In LR threads, I've even seen some very dedicated translators doing a rough translation live. So how does it follow that just because FOMOS copies down what the players said during these interviews, that text becomes their exclusive property?
Do they pay the TV interviewers for rights to the interviews, or are they just using the content under the auspice of "reporting"? If so, why can't TL be "reporting" as well?
Also: with respect to pictures. I completely understand that if FOMOS pays a photographer to go onsite and get nice shots, those shots are theirs to use to attract viewers. But what about TV still-frame shots? Can TL still use stills from, say, the broadcast interview, to provide visuals in their translations?
EDIT: I guess what I'm saying is similar to what Quickstriker said on pg 18, but with the added query of: are these interviews really the IP of fomos, rather than the TV network, to begin with? and if they are, why? Are these fomos reporters that we see interviewing players after games? If DES is different, does that mean they have a different interview with players, conducted by a different paid interviewer? I mean, who's interview/er is it anyways?
Even though I agree that a legal battle is not likely to be what is at stake, but rather respect for fomos & their request, these details are interesting to me because I don't currently understand how fomos can even ask that these interviews be respected as theirs, when as far as I know, they are just reporting, and not creating creative content (not even providing interview commentary.) Am I just wrong? I hope someone will explain.
|
On May 30 2011 05:00 jakechen wrote:
One thing I don't understand about this mess is how FOMOS has exclusive rights to interviews? These interviews are broadcast on a television network-- right? In LR threads, I've even seen some very dedicated translators doing a rough translation live. So how does it follow that just because FOMOS copies down what the players said during these interviews, that text becomes their exclusive property?
Do they pay the TV interviewers for rights to the interviews, or are they just using the content under the auspice of "reporting"? If so, why can't TL be "reporting" as well?
Also: with respect to pictures. I completely understand that if FOMOS pays a photographer to go onsite and get nice shots, those shots are theirs to use to attract viewers. But what about TV still-frame shots? Can TL still use stills from, say, the broadcast interview, to provide visuals in their translations?
EDIT: I guess what I'm saying is similar to what Quickstriker said on pg 18, but with the added query of: are these interviews really the IP of fomos, rather than the TV network, to begin with? and if they are, why? Are these fomos reporters that we see interviewing players after games? If DES is different, does that mean they have a different interview with players, conducted by a different paid interviewer? I mean, who's interview/er is it anyways?
Even though I agree that a legal battle is not likely to be what is at stake, but rather respect for fomos & their request, these details are interesting to me because I don't currently understand how fomos can even ask that these interviews be respected as theirs, when as far as I know, they are just reporting, and not creating creative content (not even providing interview commentary.) Am I just wrong? I hope someone will explain.
Interviews are done separately. They don't take televised interviews and write down what people said on television. Though the questions are similar, they do this in the press room backstage, or in the resting area behind the stadium. They conduct the interviews themselves.
AFAIK (Milkis fix me if I'm wrong here) DES and FOMOS are in the same room as the interviews are going on. They both write down the questions from other people, as well as themselves, and the answer from the player. DES does write better, more accurate interviews than FOMOS (as fomos tends to edit some things), but the interviews contain almost same if not identical content on both websites.
|
On May 30 2011 05:31 supernovamaniac wrote:Show nested quote +On May 30 2011 05:00 jakechen wrote:
One thing I don't understand about this mess is how FOMOS has exclusive rights to interviews? These interviews are broadcast on a television network-- right? In LR threads, I've even seen some very dedicated translators doing a rough translation live. So how does it follow that just because FOMOS copies down what the players said during these interviews, that text becomes their exclusive property?
Do they pay the TV interviewers for rights to the interviews, or are they just using the content under the auspice of "reporting"? If so, why can't TL be "reporting" as well?
Also: with respect to pictures. I completely understand that if FOMOS pays a photographer to go onsite and get nice shots, those shots are theirs to use to attract viewers. But what about TV still-frame shots? Can TL still use stills from, say, the broadcast interview, to provide visuals in their translations?
EDIT: I guess what I'm saying is similar to what Quickstriker said on pg 18, but with the added query of: are these interviews really the IP of fomos, rather than the TV network, to begin with? and if they are, why? Are these fomos reporters that we see interviewing players after games? If DES is different, does that mean they have a different interview with players, conducted by a different paid interviewer? I mean, who's interview/er is it anyways?
Even though I agree that a legal battle is not likely to be what is at stake, but rather respect for fomos & their request, these details are interesting to me because I don't currently understand how fomos can even ask that these interviews be respected as theirs, when as far as I know, they are just reporting, and not creating creative content (not even providing interview commentary.) Am I just wrong? I hope someone will explain. Interviews are done separately. They don't take televised interviews and write down what people said on television. Though the questions are similar, they do this in the press room backstage, or in the resting area behind the stadium. They conduct the interviews themselves. AFAIK (Milkis fix me if I'm wrong here) DES and FOMOS are in the same room as the interviews are going on. They both write down the questions from other people, as well as themselves, and the answer from the player. DES does write better, more accurate interviews than FOMOS (as fomos tends to edit some things), but the interviews contain almost same if not identical content on both websites.
Thanks very much for clarifying, that was helpful to understand. So, the interviews really belong to fomos, or are perhaps jointly owned by DES and fomos (implying, I would think, that if fomos doesn't want TL using it, they wouldn't want DES letting TL use it either; and in fact, they may be on the same page with DES to begin with). I guess the follow-up question is, can translators still translate stuff from the TV broadcast, by recording the stream? I figure they haven't been doing that as much up till now because it was more convenient to get the text, but are there any legal reasons not to transcribe the TV interviews?
If not, then supposing some of the translators would be up for it (I'm betting it's more work this way), then maybe this would be a good solution...?
|
On May 30 2011 05:59 jakechen wrote:Show nested quote +On May 30 2011 05:31 supernovamaniac wrote:On May 30 2011 05:00 jakechen wrote:
One thing I don't understand about this mess is how FOMOS has exclusive rights to interviews? These interviews are broadcast on a television network-- right? In LR threads, I've even seen some very dedicated translators doing a rough translation live. So how does it follow that just because FOMOS copies down what the players said during these interviews, that text becomes their exclusive property?
Do they pay the TV interviewers for rights to the interviews, or are they just using the content under the auspice of "reporting"? If so, why can't TL be "reporting" as well?
Also: with respect to pictures. I completely understand that if FOMOS pays a photographer to go onsite and get nice shots, those shots are theirs to use to attract viewers. But what about TV still-frame shots? Can TL still use stills from, say, the broadcast interview, to provide visuals in their translations?
EDIT: I guess what I'm saying is similar to what Quickstriker said on pg 18, but with the added query of: are these interviews really the IP of fomos, rather than the TV network, to begin with? and if they are, why? Are these fomos reporters that we see interviewing players after games? If DES is different, does that mean they have a different interview with players, conducted by a different paid interviewer? I mean, who's interview/er is it anyways?
Even though I agree that a legal battle is not likely to be what is at stake, but rather respect for fomos & their request, these details are interesting to me because I don't currently understand how fomos can even ask that these interviews be respected as theirs, when as far as I know, they are just reporting, and not creating creative content (not even providing interview commentary.) Am I just wrong? I hope someone will explain. Interviews are done separately. They don't take televised interviews and write down what people said on television. Though the questions are similar, they do this in the press room backstage, or in the resting area behind the stadium. They conduct the interviews themselves. AFAIK (Milkis fix me if I'm wrong here) DES and FOMOS are in the same room as the interviews are going on. They both write down the questions from other people, as well as themselves, and the answer from the player. DES does write better, more accurate interviews than FOMOS (as fomos tends to edit some things), but the interviews contain almost same if not identical content on both websites. Thanks very much for clarifying, that was helpful to understand. So, the interviews really belong to fomos, or are perhaps jointly owned by DES and fomos (implying, I would think, that if fomos doesn't want TL using it, they wouldn't want DES letting TL use it either; and in fact, they may be on the same page with DES to begin with). I guess the follow-up question is, can translators still translate stuff from the TV broadcast, by recording the stream? I figure they haven't been doing that as much up till now because it was more convenient to get the text, but are there any legal reasons not to transcribe the TV interviews? If not, then supposing some of the translators would be up for it (I'm betting it's more work this way), then maybe this would be a good solution...?
I don't think there's any problem with translating DES interviews though
|
On May 30 2011 06:05 Ikonn wrote:Show nested quote +On May 30 2011 05:59 jakechen wrote:On May 30 2011 05:31 supernovamaniac wrote:On May 30 2011 05:00 jakechen wrote:
One thing I don't understand about this mess is how FOMOS has exclusive rights to interviews? These interviews are broadcast on a television network-- right? In LR threads, I've even seen some very dedicated translators doing a rough translation live. So how does it follow that just because FOMOS copies down what the players said during these interviews, that text becomes their exclusive property?
Do they pay the TV interviewers for rights to the interviews, or are they just using the content under the auspice of "reporting"? If so, why can't TL be "reporting" as well?
Also: with respect to pictures. I completely understand that if FOMOS pays a photographer to go onsite and get nice shots, those shots are theirs to use to attract viewers. But what about TV still-frame shots? Can TL still use stills from, say, the broadcast interview, to provide visuals in their translations?
EDIT: I guess what I'm saying is similar to what Quickstriker said on pg 18, but with the added query of: are these interviews really the IP of fomos, rather than the TV network, to begin with? and if they are, why? Are these fomos reporters that we see interviewing players after games? If DES is different, does that mean they have a different interview with players, conducted by a different paid interviewer? I mean, who's interview/er is it anyways?
Even though I agree that a legal battle is not likely to be what is at stake, but rather respect for fomos & their request, these details are interesting to me because I don't currently understand how fomos can even ask that these interviews be respected as theirs, when as far as I know, they are just reporting, and not creating creative content (not even providing interview commentary.) Am I just wrong? I hope someone will explain. Interviews are done separately. They don't take televised interviews and write down what people said on television. Though the questions are similar, they do this in the press room backstage, or in the resting area behind the stadium. They conduct the interviews themselves. AFAIK (Milkis fix me if I'm wrong here) DES and FOMOS are in the same room as the interviews are going on. They both write down the questions from other people, as well as themselves, and the answer from the player. DES does write better, more accurate interviews than FOMOS (as fomos tends to edit some things), but the interviews contain almost same if not identical content on both websites. Thanks very much for clarifying, that was helpful to understand. So, the interviews really belong to fomos, or are perhaps jointly owned by DES and fomos (implying, I would think, that if fomos doesn't want TL using it, they wouldn't want DES letting TL use it either; and in fact, they may be on the same page with DES to begin with). I guess the follow-up question is, can translators still translate stuff from the TV broadcast, by recording the stream? I figure they haven't been doing that as much up till now because it was more convenient to get the text, but are there any legal reasons not to transcribe the TV interviews? If not, then supposing some of the translators would be up for it (I'm betting it's more work this way), then maybe this would be a good solution...? I don't think there's any problem with translating DES interviews though
Well... that's great if true, but I'm skeptical. I mean... I don't know what fomos could hope to gain from this move if DES has "almost same if not identical content" and is not of the same mind. I know people earlier in the thread have pointed DES out as a nicer alternative to fomos, but now I'm not so sure. Maybe DES is just letting fomos front this one for now, but is ready to say the same thing if it becomes necessary. Meaning, that interview translators might risk any hard work they put into a DES interview disappearing, the same way the fomos-based content is now gone. That's not necessarily a problem if you are just thinking in terms of getting up a quick interview for the fans, and are willing to use any source until you are told to stop. But I'm just imagining that if I ran TL, or if I were an translator, I'd ideally want reliable, continuous sources to build an archive/show my work. That's a lot of value to risk losing, in the long run...
|
On May 30 2011 05:59 jakechen wrote:Show nested quote +On May 30 2011 05:31 supernovamaniac wrote:On May 30 2011 05:00 jakechen wrote:
One thing I don't understand about this mess is how FOMOS has exclusive rights to interviews? These interviews are broadcast on a television network-- right? In LR threads, I've even seen some very dedicated translators doing a rough translation live. So how does it follow that just because FOMOS copies down what the players said during these interviews, that text becomes their exclusive property?
Do they pay the TV interviewers for rights to the interviews, or are they just using the content under the auspice of "reporting"? If so, why can't TL be "reporting" as well?
Also: with respect to pictures. I completely understand that if FOMOS pays a photographer to go onsite and get nice shots, those shots are theirs to use to attract viewers. But what about TV still-frame shots? Can TL still use stills from, say, the broadcast interview, to provide visuals in their translations?
EDIT: I guess what I'm saying is similar to what Quickstriker said on pg 18, but with the added query of: are these interviews really the IP of fomos, rather than the TV network, to begin with? and if they are, why? Are these fomos reporters that we see interviewing players after games? If DES is different, does that mean they have a different interview with players, conducted by a different paid interviewer? I mean, who's interview/er is it anyways?
Even though I agree that a legal battle is not likely to be what is at stake, but rather respect for fomos & their request, these details are interesting to me because I don't currently understand how fomos can even ask that these interviews be respected as theirs, when as far as I know, they are just reporting, and not creating creative content (not even providing interview commentary.) Am I just wrong? I hope someone will explain. Interviews are done separately. They don't take televised interviews and write down what people said on television. Though the questions are similar, they do this in the press room backstage, or in the resting area behind the stadium. They conduct the interviews themselves. AFAIK (Milkis fix me if I'm wrong here) DES and FOMOS are in the same room as the interviews are going on. They both write down the questions from other people, as well as themselves, and the answer from the player. DES does write better, more accurate interviews than FOMOS (as fomos tends to edit some things), but the interviews contain almost same if not identical content on both websites. Thanks very much for clarifying, that was helpful to understand. So, the interviews really belong to fomos, or are perhaps jointly owned by DES and fomos (implying, I would think, that if fomos doesn't want TL using it, they wouldn't want DES letting TL use it either; and in fact, they may be on the same page with DES to begin with). I guess the follow-up question is, can translators still translate stuff from the TV broadcast, by recording the stream? I figure they haven't been doing that as much up till now because it was more convenient to get the text, but are there any legal reasons not to transcribe the TV interviews? If not, then supposing some of the translators would be up for it (I'm betting it's more work this way), then maybe this would be a good solution...?
Interviews (that are posted online) belong to the respective writers/company.
If there was someone from TL in the press room translating the interviews, it's ours.
|
sounds like TL needs another office in seoul
tlhq2
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
