On 4/22/98, Marie Lasnier <lasnier[_at_]dag.ca> wrote:
>
> Using the french version of the treaty ("les parties contractantes
> doivent prevoir ... des sanctions juridiques efficaces contre la
> neutralisation des mesures techniques mises en oeuvre par les auteurs
> ... et qui restreignent l'accomplissement ... d'actes qui ne sont pas
> autorises par les auteurs concernes OU permis par la loi") I believe the
> correct meaning is b). As I understand the french version, it's enough
> for those acts to be either not authorized or not permitted. They don't
> need to be neither ... nor ..., which would probably be in french "ni
> autorises ... ni permis...".
I'm very glad you raised this because, for me at least, it raises some other questions. How many languages is the Treaty in? The WIPO website has three different flavors: French, Spanish, and English. For each flavor it has the text of the Treaty. Are there other languages? How is the treaty drafted and approved? In what language? Who translates?
It struck me -- and perhaps I'm just being an arrogant anglophile here -- that the Treaty was drafted in English and then translated. If that's the case, that might explain why the other language versions so closely parallel the English one, including what I consider to be ambiguities.
In French you have:
"ne sont pas autorises par les auteurs concernes ou permis par la loi."
In Spanish you have:
"no esten autorizados por los autores concernidos o permitidos por la Ley."
Pretty literal translations. I'm not sure that one can make appropriate deductions from other versions if they were translated from some central version. Anyone know the mechanics?
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Mon Mar 26 2007 - 00:35:29 GMT