|
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)
Actually, if it came down to a court case, then the plaintiff should be seeking to litigate in the jurisdiction where the defendant has its assets located. That way, the decision can actually be enforced by the court and the plaintiff can actually get a proper remedy from it.
So in this case, if Fomos wanted to sue TL for condoning breach of copyright, then it will most likely try to litigate in the US, unless there are significant advantages to litigate elsewhere. I don't even know if this is viable for them because I don't know if they have much of a presence in the US to actually attempt to enter legal proceedings. The choice of law (i.e. Korean law or US law) will depend on the US choice of law rules, which I don't know about.
I think TL is just trying to be civil here rather than being afraid of any possible litigation. Even if there was to be litigation, the amount that Fomos can sue for is probably very minimal.
On the whole, I just think Fomos are being completely jackasses in grinding out a fractious relationship between two e-sports community sites. It is completely ungracious of them, and they fail to respect the fact that TL is 99% of the reason why non-Koreans know of the existence of their existence in the first place. While most businesses would agree that free publicity is fantastic, Fomos actually tried to get some deal out of it from a Chinese website. I have no idea about the details of the deal, but I can't imagine it to be worth more than a few hundred or thousand dollars.
No class.
|
Bisutopia19373 Posts
When I move to Korea, I'll start doing the interviews myself. Brood War just has to promise to stay around another 5 years.
|
GRAND OLD AMERICA16375 Posts
On May 30 2011 11:10 BisuDagger wrote:
When I move to Korea, I'll start doing the interviews myself. Brood War just has to promise to stay around another 5 years.
I don't know, you might just be stuck trying to stalk Bisu around and not deliver any other interviews.
+ Show Spoiler +LOL JKJK 
|
LOL, you people are really thinking about legal actions????
just stop using fomos content... WTF!
|
If you told me a year ago that fomos establishing an english site would turn out to be a bad thing, i wouldn't have believed it :/
|
Russian Federation905 Posts
On May 30 2011 12:42 amazingxkcd wrote:Show nested quote +On May 30 2011 11:10 BisuDagger wrote:
When I move to Korea, I'll start doing the interviews myself. Brood War just has to promise to stay around another 5 years. I don't know, you might just be stuck trying to stalk Bisu around and not deliver any other interviews. + Show Spoiler +LOL JKJK
lol this could be true :p
|
Uhh you could just link the SDM translated content in the report/interview thread OPs...
|
Canada11592 Posts
On May 30 2011 14:08 xarthaz wrote:
Uhh you could just link the SDM translated content in the report/interview thread OPs...
True, but the point is Fomos is generally tardy with their interviews, the interviews are not always translated in full, and the quality is not the greatest. Better off finding a different source for interviews.
|
On May 30 2011 14:16 Falling wrote:Show nested quote +On May 30 2011 14:08 xarthaz wrote:
Uhh you could just link the SDM translated content in the report/interview thread OPs... True, but the point is Fomos is generally tardy with their interviews, the interviews are not always translated in full, and the quality is not the greatest. Better off finding a different source for interviews.
and to top it off, they dont come as timely as TL translators
|
Canada11592 Posts
What I meant by tardy interviews, but speedy translations are kinda a big deal so the point might as well be emphasized
Basically the volunteer team of translators at TL is amazing!
|
Russian Federation905 Posts
Well, one solution would be to have an OP with a snippet of the interview and refer to the fomos global site, while tl have a discussion on the said thread. Only prob is the time itd take fomos to come up with the translations.
|
On May 30 2011 02:02 QuickStriker wrote:Show nested quote +On May 29 2011 21:21 tomstrife wrote:Fair use, a limitation and exception to the exclusive right granted by copyright law to the author of a creative work, is a doctrine in United States copyright law that allows limited use of copyrighted material without acquiring permission from the rights holders. Examples of fair use include commentary, criticism, news reporting, research, teaching, library archiving and scholarship. It provides for the legal, non-licensed citation or incorporation of copyrighted material in another author's work under a four-factor balancing test. The term fair use originated in the United States. A similar principle, fair dealing, exists in some other common law jurisdictions. Civil law jurisdictions have other limitations and exceptions to copyright I'd say that it would fall under commentary and news... Maybe not the photos, but one of the main reasons people can post clips of movies, etc on YouTube (if there Is anything similar in Korea?). I know many circumvent copyright laws like that in America... Unfortunately the only lawyers I know are American ones. So clarifying once again, wouldn't the translations, interviews, and "news" threads that our TL translators do count as " fair use"? Remember, teamliquid.net IS A " NEWS" organization, even said it on top "Starcraft Progaming NEWS". Even if we have ADs and TL.net generate some money via ADs, isn't that also what countless legit news organizations and sites do and have anyway? Like FOX News, NBC, TMZ, CNN, BBC, ABC, all have ads somewhere on the page of the news and I'm pretty sure NOT all of them have pictures and stories that were completely linked source of the original source because of the "Fair Use" doctrine. So what is the difference between those sites and this site? There really isn't a difference and I'm sure they pull international news as well, especially like CNN and BBC with sources being from others. And because the translations of interviews/news are in English (WHICH THEY DON'T ORIGINALLY HAVE IN THEIR SITE on Fomos) and not in Korean (the ORIGINAL LANGUAGE), wouldn't that be an original or deviated work from our TL translators? And lastly, I believe the US law succeed all other international laws as someone mentioned earlier when the two parties are in US and different country (Korea) and the conflict is located in US since TL is located in US and it's Fomos -> TL meaning Korea to US (unlike Blizzard to Kespa which is US to Korea). So Korean law may be invalid and we can go under the US law instead which many media corporations take advantage of, because TL is a media organization. Just 2 cents.
Since i live with a journalist i can give some feedback here.
It is absolutely NOT okay for a news site to copy another news site's interview, and photos are even worse. If you pay attention when you read articles you will see that they often pull out quotes from a interview, without posting the questions. And then cite thier competitor as a source, something they really really hate having to do. For smaller magazies getting a big sports scoop first forcing the "big boys" to cite you as a source is considered a big win.
So, it would be okay for a TL member to post a thread about a specific answer from a fomos interview, quote the answer, and then comment on it and open up for discussion about that answer. That is fair use. Translating and reposting large sections does not fall under fair use.
Also fairly common in sports journalism is "rewrites", if one paper do not have time to attend a smaller match or cant get in touch with the coach for an after game interview for whatever reason they wait until a competitor posts thier after game article and then does "rewrite". Meaning they rewrite it in thier own words, and then pull a quote from the coach stolen from thier competitors interview.
Depending on how classy they are they might or might not cite the other news site as source, coaches pretty much give the exact same answers to each journalist after a game so in 99% of the time you can get away with not citing the source.
Also, press conferences are sometimes considered "free for all", if one journalist asks a really good question it would be silly if every journalist from the other magazines would have to ask the same question to be allowed to print it.
Lastly, on news-aggregating-sites on the internet (TL, Reddit, Digg, etc) it is fairly common to post a stub from an article or interview and then link to the source for the full read. Idea is the stub grabs the readers interest and then the original publisher gets more wievers. Both Reddit and the original publisher prosper from this, Reddit users can easily find articles regarding thier interests regardless of the publisher and can discuss it with other Reddit users. And the original publisher gets more wievers and credit for their work.
If Fomos are launching an english site i cant imagine them NOT asking other sites to stop posting full translations. Just like Japanese anime/manga publishers dont mind fansubs of thier work if it is not licensed by an english publisher, but as soon as it is licenced in english they start caring.
|
On May 30 2011 15:27 sovetskysoyuz wrote:
Well, one solution would be to have an OP with a snippet of the interview and refer to the fomos global site, while tl have a discussion on the said thread. Only prob is the time itd take fomos to come up with the translations.
That thread would most likely turn out to be a flame thread about translation by comparing the kr to english version of the same article...
|
|
|
Cranking out poorly written konglish articles is pretty hard work.
|
i understand teamliquid's position of not being able to contract because the writers arent employed
+ Show Spoiler +
|
Russian Federation905 Posts
FOMOS position on TL
+ Show Spoiler +FOMOS' position with teamliquid
2011년 05월 30일 15시 56분
[FOMOS]
1. Fomos first contacted teamliquid on a possible partnership last year in April, Fomos initially thought, since teamliquid was a non-profit organization, there is no need to stir up emotions by pointing out the fact that they have been using the Fomos’ content without permission. It turns out that they do make profit. But that was still okay if they were willing to sign a legitimate contract with FOMOS.
2. FOMOS requests:
A.10 articles per MONTH, and a formal contract.
3. Teamliquid’s initial reaction was ok, later respectfully denies.
A. on the grounds that writers are volunteers, and that they don’t control them. However do suggest that they do have influence over the writers.
Fomos is an incorporated company, it is imperative that all deals must be concrete on a piece of paper, a contract. Can’t fathom the idea of not knowing how many pages could be provided as translation work.
Fomos is very baffled by the stance of teamliquid, but is persistent on forming a partnership with teamliquid. Nearly a year passes by, in this time FOMOS articles are still posted on Teamliquid. Fomos is not appreciative of this.
2011
FOMOS hires a staff to run the GLOBAL page.
Still wants a contract with teamliquid, FOMOS wants to negotiate the grounds of using some of their original English articles as well.
Teamliquid feels that taking the English articles is not a good deal for them. However the FOMOS translated articles can be taken by FOMOS.
Aforementioned offer is nonsensical to FOMOS since, it already has a translator, more will be hired in the near future.
FOMOS doesn’t need the translated articles, since they have a staff member to do it, but still wants to make a deal as long as some original English written articles can be used.
The deal is refused, FOMOS notifies teamliquid to stop using our content.
If FOMOS doesn’t get more than just a translated work of FOMOS’ content, it is not in the best interest of FOMOS to form a partnership with teamliquid, in fact when teamliquid translates what’s already been translated or what is about to be translated by FOMOS, it creates a huge detriment to FOMOS.
FOMOS just simply wants them to stop using FOMOS content, since it is FOMOS’
FOMOS is an incorporated company, has 10 staff members, whom works the arduous hours of working around the clock, photographers and writers also wishes strongly for them to stop taking their articles.
superdaniel@fomos.co.kr
twitter:superdanielman
The above is the verbatim from Fomos.
Now it gets interesting. So let me get this straight.
1. Fomos tolerated TL from using/translating its contents because it thought TL was non-profit
2. Fomos found out TL is a business, but still oks the use of its contents but wants an agreement and a contract
3. April 2010, Fomos talks to TL, states its requests:
"10 articles per month, and a formal contract" (later on this)
4. TL does agree fully, saying it has no control over the contributors
5. Fomos demands its right to its contents, and have the agreement in black ad white, but TL seems vague on it(?) This initial discussion end in the meantime, while TL still uses Fomos contents.
6. 2011, Fomos starts global page. Renegotiates with TL, asking for rights to its original English articles as well. TL rejects this, but would be ok for Fomos to use the translated articles that came from Fomos in the first place.
7. Fomos does not understand this, citing that it has little use for the translation if ITS own contents given it already has translators and there are more to be hired
8. Fomos demands TL to stop infringing its contents. So here we are now.
So based on this, TL is the one who actually stone-walled? Is this correct? I wonder how the negotiations went, and why, if Fomos version is correct, TL refused use of its original content when Fomos is opening its contents to TL. Btw, does the "10-article" thing mean that Fomos wants TL to publish ONLY 10 of its articles in a month? I can see this as difficult for TL, since on a good month, as many as 30 interviews are made. Still, it is Fomos contents. All throughout their statement, Fomos seems to emphasize that they are they once actually reaching out and negotiating, which imo should be the other way around. If everyhthing Fomos said in there is true and is the whole picture of this story, I think TL was a little to hard and could have negotiated a mutually beneficial middle ground. Can TL please enlighten us on this one.
|
Russian Federation905 Posts
On May 30 2011 17:50 Megaliskuu wrote:Cranking out poorly written konglish articles is pretty hard work.
Read it. It worth reading what it contains if you want to get a good picture of this story.
|
On May 30 2011 17:36 Frankon wrote:Show nested quote +On May 30 2011 15:27 sovetskysoyuz wrote:
Well, one solution would be to have an OP with a snippet of the interview and refer to the fomos global site, while tl have a discussion on the said thread. Only prob is the time itd take fomos to come up with the translations. That thread would most likely turn out to be a flame thread about translation by comparing the kr to english version of the same article...
Well this is possible but difficult since only a part will be in the OP. Contributors can then translate the interview one-question per one post per one-contributor. LOL. Messy but possible. It is still infringement, but Fomos has to track the entire thread to make sure it does not happen.
I just read fomos statement, interesting indeed.
|
Russian Federation905 Posts
On May 30 2011 19:01 whiterabb1t wrote:Show nested quote +On May 30 2011 17:36 Frankon wrote:On May 30 2011 15:27 sovetskysoyuz wrote:
Well, one solution would be to have an OP with a snippet of the interview and refer to the fomos global site, while tl have a discussion on the said thread. Only prob is the time itd take fomos to come up with the translations. That thread would most likely turn out to be a flame thread about translation by comparing the kr to english version of the same article... Well this is possible but difficult since only a part will be in the OP. Contributors can then translate the interview one-question per one post per one-contributor. LOL. Messy but possible. It is still infringement, but Fomos has to track the entire thread to make sure it does not happen. I just read fomos statement, interesting indeed.
It is creative, but it should be TL who should make sure it does not happen, if it wants to avoid any legal problems. I really want to know what TL has to say on this.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
