Profanity-scrubbing app *profanity in link*

[Penpilot]

What's changing the text is the app - and it's that which may be suspect under copyright infringement as the author has not authorised the 'translation'.

BUT - they're not free to alter them for others - that's a fundamental tenant of copyright - they're not free to make a changed version of the text for profit or otherwise) which is what this app is doing and why its so scary.

What do you think of Google translate or those apps being developed that can translate things on the fly from one language to another? One could say that those things infringe on language/translation rights, limiting an author's ability to sell their stories to foreign markets.

No doubt the app is 'safe' because it's only an enabling bit of software that sneaks through the cracks - but it goes against my main beliefs that things should not be white-washed - and that we should be adult enough to see things for what they really are. And then either accept them or reject them.

I dislike it probably as much as you do. Hearing/reading a bit profanity IMHO isn't harmful. But to me this program falls in the ballpark of "I do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it."

 

[Terry Greer]

What do you think of Google translate or those apps being developed that can translate things on the fly from one language to another? One could say that those things infringe on language/translation rights, limiting an author's ability to sell their stories to foreign markets.
"

I know what you're saying - but all copyright hinges on the amount being copied - whether it's substantive or not - and that's often subjective and depends on a host of other factors - hell I've even lectured university students on it on a game design course.
However, translating a sign or a phrase or a short paragraph is (even under current copyright law) nowhere near the same as doing it for a whole book. That does infringe copyright - so I'm interested to see how this pans out.

Besides laws are made by man - we define what those laws should be - they don't exist in isolation. So what do we want our elective representatives to push for?

Copyright started with only a 14 year term in the US - and has increased to it's currently obscene life + 50 years largely as a result of lobbying from large companies such as music and Disney to prevent their works leaving copyright.

 

[Steerpike]

A person generally is free to alter their own copy of a work. I can highlight, underline, or even black-out text in a physical book. It shouldn't be any different with an app like this, so long as it is operating only on a local copy of a book that a reader has already purchased. I suspect if they keep going with the app, that's the way things are going to end up. As I understand the app, it doesn't even alter the underlying ebook. It's just an overlay when you're reading it, and one that the end user decides for herself to use (and how to use it).

 

[Terry Greer]

yep - it does depend on how it's interpreted by the law - and the law will probably allow it along the lines of what Steerpike says - but being a mechanical translation device - that's still not a certainty. There are similar parallels with devices developed for making video games easier to play - many of which do fall outside the law despite only allowing people to play things their way(similar to what's been argued).

Legal or not - it's reprehensable and in no way should be condoned. It's a way people can sanitise what they don't want to see - like sticking fingers in their ears or wearing blinkers - or listing to fox news.

On the face of it it doesn't seem that big an issue - 'let people do what they want' seems eminently sensible. But this sort of alteration goes beyond that. Software like this by default separates people from having the same experience, from sharing the same world - there's no longer a single version of the words of the text and therefore the meaning is changed.

I do see others point of view, honestly, and my rant on this may seem excessive and petty given that (currently) it's only about what some think as profanity. After all what meaning can be lost (well from all accounts a lot of subtly and detail regarding parts of the body and actions - a lot of which are grouped to generic terms such as 'chest'). To be fair - not much if it were just this app and just this one action - but it won't be - they'll be another step taken at some point.

Yes - I have sympathy for the view that people should be able to enjoy things in their own way - but I don't agree with it.
I see it as a symptom of a far more insidious malaise in society that won't face up to reality and would rather not see what it doesn't like.

But quite apart from whether it's legal or not - is the question do we LIKE it?

I vote no.

Ok rant over - I won't say anything else on the subject