translation and fair use (US copyright law)

February 22, 2023 8:45 AM

I would like to make an unofficial translation of a copyrighted book and print one copy. Is this legal? If I do it only for my own personal use? What if I give a copy to a friend? Will a copy shop print and bind this for me, or would that be considered "distribution"? My understanding is that translation does not fall under fair use exceptions for criticism, parody, or other allowed uses.
posted by epanalepsis to Law & Government (8 answers total)

If you use Amazon print on demand, you can create a paperback title and print up to five copies of the draft at a time without ever publishing it. The copies will have a gray band across the cover saying not for resale. I don’t think they bother reviewing anything for copyright issues until it is actually submitted for publication. I don’t know anything about the legality of doing this with a copyrighted work.
posted by snofoam at 8:54 AM on February 22, 2023 [2 favorites]

The translation rights will be owned by either the author or publisher, so yes, this is intellectual property theft. It's not an especially heinous crime if you're genuinely printing one copy of a work that has not otherwise been translated into your language, but it's not legal and it's not something where fair use is really relevant. (Not a lawyer, do work in publishing!)
posted by babelfish at 9:34 AM on February 22, 2023 [1 favorite]

Response by poster: There are no official translations in this language nor will the publisher be at all interested in making them. I literally just want one copy for my own private use or maybe to read with a friend. I know it's illegal - I guess the question is really, can I have this printed anywhere or do I have to handwrite it out all out myself in the secrecy of my living room? If I send it to a print on demand service will that be a mistake?

But now I am thinking maybe I should have the mods delete this question and figure it out some other way.
posted by epanalepsis at 10:16 AM on February 22, 2023

This is not legal advice, but the odds that anyone will notice or care about a print of a single copy are just vanishingly small. The worst thing that is likely to happen is that someone refuses to print it.

(I try to be careful ethically, but I find it extremely difficult to care about supposed "theft" for personal use of an IP right that is not being exercised and which you could not readily obtain licensing for, presumably because the publisher doesn't think there is any profit for the author in it. If it really bothers you, buy an extra copy of the original for rough justice.)
posted by praemunire at 10:57 AM on February 22, 2023 [4 favorites]

I'm not convinced it is a violation of copyright without distribution. This sort of random page says:

Service of translator is also commonly availed by libraries, especially those in the for-profit sector, when the library engages the services of a translator or translation service to translate a scientific or technical article for use within that company. In these cases, the article is translated and a single copy is delivered to the company. This copy is then passed around to the researchers who need to see it.

It also constantly specifies distribution as a condition of infringing:

Only the copyright owner can authorize a translation that will be distributed. This includes works that are translated into another language and distributed in parts of the world where that language is spoken. Derivative works are infringing if they are not created with the permission of the copyright holder. Thus, a work of fiction or a best-selling biography cannot be translated into another language and distributed without the original author’s or copyright holder’s permission.

I think you should do what you want to do, and snofoam's answer is the best answer. If a POD service doesn't want to print it, they won't print it — but they also won't turn you in to the copyright police (who don't exist, and again distribution would be necessary for the copyright holder to even know you exist).
posted by xueexueg at 12:19 PM on February 22, 2023 [1 favorite]

This article from the School of Law at University of Georgia suggests that there are two different schools of thought about whether it is a legal to make a personal copy of a copyrighted work for private use. I think a translation is a copy (although you acquire rights in your specific translation, you can't do anything with it without permission of the copyright own). However, making a copy of a friend is by definition not personal use.

Whether a print on demand or copy center place would print it for you would depend in part on their own policies (Last time I printed something, I think at Fed Ex, I had to sign something saying that I owned the copyright or had permission to be making the copies.) plus whether or not the document looked like it was likely to be a copyright infringement.
posted by metahawk at 6:13 PM on February 22, 2023

IANAL, TINLA. According to this European Union Intellectual Property Office FAQ, "Without the author’s permission works may be reproduced and translated for personal use and non-commercial purposes." (My emphasis.)

I don't know about applicable law in the US, but I very much doubt that the copyright owner or licensee would pursue any legal action against a private individual who translated a book for personal use and perhaps gave one copy to a friend. US copyright law does allow for statutory penalties for copyright infringement (even if there were no monetary losses to the owner), but it seems unlikely the copyright owner would even find out. If they did, they might be flattered.
posted by brianogilvie at 2:43 PM on February 23, 2023 [1 favorite]

That paper metahawk posted above — a masters thesis for an LL.M. in 1997 — is a very interesting read! For anyone reading this far & wanting to hear more about this (esp. in the later sections). The paper plainly favors one of the two schools of thought over the other.
posted by xueexueg at 12:36 AM on February 24, 2023