Fajro wrote: > On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 8:38 PM, Ragib Hasan <ragibha...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> (The tool used was Google Translation Toolkit. (not Google Translate). >> There is a distinction between these two tools. Google Translation >> Toolkit (GTT) is a translation-memory based semi-manual translation >> tool. That is, it learns translation skills as you gradually translate >> articles by hand. Later, this can be used to automate translation.) >> > Another issue: The resulting translation memory is not free
This is a red herring. Some real and important issues have been raised about machine translations, but this is not one of them. The fact that the source codes for the translation processes are not free does not make the results of such machine translations unfree. Key to anything being copyright is that material must be original and not the result of a mechanical process. Machine translations are mechanical processes. Another person using the same software with the same text should have the same results. It is also important that the allegedly infringing text must have been fixed in some medium. A person issuing a take down order must show, as an necessary element of that order, where the material in question was previously published. Two identical texts by different authors need not be copies of each other. With human efforts two such identical texts are highly improbable, but this need not be the case with machine translation. Indeed if the same software keeps producing different results I would question its reliability. Ray _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l