Rule Ratification: Contributor Agreement (Wiki) Version 1.0

[Misogi]

II. Under no circumstances would you submit works that are licensed in the country the server (USA) and/or the submitter is located in.

If we follow this closely, then it wouldn't be possible to post any existing language for a series licensed in the US, for instance. And if I lived in the US, then I would go against the rules if I posted French S&W translations.
-> II. Under no circumstances would you submit works that are licensed and published in the server's (USA) and/or the submitter's language.
Perhaps I may've understood it wrongly.

Furthermore, about the following point:

VIII. All Baka-Tsuki Translation Projects must be open to the public. Prospective contributors may not be denied participation rights in the Project.

I'd like to add the exception of Hosted Projects. The French project of Index relies on an external partnership, in which the translator recruitment is restricted.
Putting a veto would complicate current and further partnerships (and there is a decent number of them among French projects).

Hence my Wait vote.

[cloudii]

I think the words "Do not argue." should be removed.

Done.

With regards to the later point about appeals. Appeals can always be made to an individual of Administration. It sort of happens naturally even without stating it.

Example: Mystiofic is posting summaries instead of translations of DAL. Several members get aggravated, and hence starts the circulation of comments around talk pages. By the end of this, multiple supervisors got the message and then there was a thread in the Administration board about summaries. Basically, the appeals process starts by itself, and a number of people end up hearing about it.

Should these groups and their requirements/duties be defined somewhere? Also would it it better to have a general administrative contact page instead of having a member randomly contact someone from the Wiki Supervisors list?

Should someone without Translator status post translations? Or is Translator status to be given as a recognition of past (and ongoing) contributions? Project Editor appears to be officially defined in the Project Conventions draft

Ugu… xD If we have a page listing duties, it'll be elsewhere. Don't want to clutter this page with usergroup rights and responsibilities. The Usergroups aren't really that important, except it gives some extra deletion/moving privileges. You don't need to be in the translator usergroup to translate. 99% of the time, supervisors invite people to user groups, not the other way around….

If we follow this closely, then it wouldn't be possible to post any existing language for a series licensed in the US, for instance. And if I lived in the US, then I would go against the rules if I posted French S&W translations.
-> II. Under no circumstances would you submit works that are licensed and published in the server's (USA) and/or the submitter's language.
Perhaps I may've understood it wrongly.

This one you have to take up with TLG. xD

Section B Under no circumstances would you(b2) 1. submit works(a) that are licenced(d) in the country the server and/or the submitter is located in. 2. submit translated works(a) copied directly from an unauthorized source such as, but not limited to, online, written sources etc.

…Oh, and there's that "unauthorized" line. xD

I'd like to add the exception of Hosted Projects. The French project of Index relies on an external partnership, in which the translator recruitment is restricted.
Putting a veto would complicate current and further partnerships (and there is a decent number of them among French projects).

This is actually new to me. I didn't realize Hosted Projects had that extra privilege (nor do I agree with that privilege).

This further necessitates the need to discuss (and create policy guidelines) for hosted projects.

Can we take the hosted project discussion to this thread? viewtopic.php?f=4&t=8816

[Cthaeh]

@Cthaeh: Actually, I think we could just have re-translation policy. In other words, anyone is completely free to make a total re-translation. Total re-translations should be made on a separate page, and both versions should be linked on the Project Overview Page UNLESS one of the parties agrees to have their particular version removed.

I personally don't like the idea of allowing multiple versions translations as a general policy. If there was an open policy for multiple translations, then it would run counter to "first come first served" policy of registration pages. Conversely, one issue with making a rigid policy against it is it could affect the ND projects we link "also on ..." at the discretion of the project manager. Though given that it doesn't happen too often (mostly the ND projects I think), maybe it's not all that important to have a policy on it.

[rydenius]

@cloudii Thanks! And sorry about all the extra work, I think I got a bit carried away!

With regards to the later point about appeals. Appeals can always be made to an individual of Administration. It sort of happens naturally even without stating it.

Yeah, this sounds best, and explicitly codifying it could reduce flexibility as well. But, conversely, words such as "final" should probably be removed. Since these are supposed to be over-arcing, binding rules, simply stating them clearly is strong. Whereas adding "final","absolute", etc. adds confusion. For example, if anything listed under one particular rule is "final" does that mean that it's not for other rules?
Some quick suggested improvements(?):

VI. Wiki Supervisors have the final word with regards to any global management issue.
Wiki Supervisors rank above Project Managers and manage Baka-Tsuki globally as an organization. Subsequently, Custodians rank above Supervisors, etc.

to:

VI. Wiki Supervisors have authority with regards to any global management issue.
Wiki Supervisors rank above Project Managers and manage Baka-Tsuki globally as an organization. Subsequently, Custodians rank above Supervisors, etc.

and

VII. Each Translation Project is to be viewed as autonomous, capable of determining its own Project-Specific Guidelines, and self-managing.
The Project Manager is the primary authority in a specific Translation Project.
Respect the decisions and choices of the Project Manager for your project. The Project Manager's decisions on project-related matters are final.

remove: "The Project Manager's decisions on project-related matters are final." I think the exhortation to respect the Project manager is actually more effective without this.

Ugu… xD If we have a page listing duties, it'll be elsewhere. Don't want to clutter this page with usergroup rights and responsibilities. The Usergroups aren't really that important, except it gives some extra deletion/moving privileges. You don't need to be in the translator usergroup to translate. 99% of the time, supervisors invite people to user groups, not the other way around….

Yeah, that makes the most sense. Since the Contributor Agreement is meant to be a static document, it's better to put things that it'd be useful to have the ability to change (or that might be redefined in the future) in another place. So under Special Usergroups maybe change:

Special Usergroups include: Translator, Editor, Senior Translator, Senior Editor, Wiki Supervisor, Wiki Custodian.

to:

Information on Special Usergroups can be found here[link to page with definitions].

There might be some issues with regards to the section on licensed works as well:

II. Under no circumstances would you submit works that are licensed in the country the server (USA) and/or the submitter is located in.

This sounds like submitting the original work itself (particularly since III references external "translated works"). In which case this wouldn't prohibit the submitting of say an entire original Japanese light novel in Japanese or translations of licensed works either. Should this be:

II. Under no circumstances would you submit translations of works that are licensed in the country the server (USA) and/or the submitter is located in.

Though that still leaves things ambiguous about the original work itself (is that covered elsewhere?), so maybe a separate point should be added for the original raw novel content (and possibly other prohibited/illegal types of content)?
Hmm... Then again maybe it's better as it is, with the assumption that a licensed translation of the original work is an an example of "works that are licensed", since changing it to "translations of" would effectively bar German translations of all novels officially licensed in English in the USA...
Can that be solved with specific wording concerning the language licensed? I think I'm making this too complicated and there's a simpler wording that can achieve the desired result.

Edit:

@Cthaeh: Actually, I think we could just have re-translation policy. [...]

I personally don't like the idea of allowing multiple versions translations as a general policy. [...] Though given that it doesn't happen too often (mostly the ND projects I think), maybe it's not all that important to have a policy on it.

I think it could be useful (and possibly important) to have some kind of guidelines on multiple translations (maybe that it's discouraged, but if done, here's how to do it: ...) and/or replacing existing translations. That said, it seems more like project level or style-level issue (maybe better as part of the Project Conventions?), and maybe not really something needed to be codified as part of the Contributor Agreement?

Spoiler! :

If done, I'd want "multiple translations" to be linked on/between the individual chapter pages, so as to be most compatible with the Android app and maintaining a simple layout for the overview pages, thereby allowing readers to continue along a particular translation instead of having to go back to the overview page to get the desired version for each chapter.

[Misogi]

VI. Wiki Supervisors have the final word with regards to any global management issue.
Wiki Supervisors rank above Project Managers and manage Baka-Tsuki globally as an organization. Subsequently, Custodians rank above Supervisors, etc.
->
VI. Wiki Supervisors have authority regarding any global management issue.
Wiki Supervisors rank above Project Managers and manage Baka-Tsuki globally as an organization. Subsequently, Custodians rank above Supervisors, etc.

Just a small correction.

[cloudii]

I personally don't like the idea of allowing multiple versions translations as a general policy. If there was an open policy for multiple translations, then it would run counter to "first come first served" policy of registration pages. Conversely, one issue with making a rigid policy against it is it could affect the ND projects we link "also on ..." at the discretion of the project manager. Though given that it doesn't happen too often (mostly the ND projects I think), maybe it's not all that important to have a policy on it.

Sure. We won't say anything on this then.

VI. Wiki Supervisors have authority with regards to any global management issue.
Wiki Supervisors rank above Project Managers and manage Baka-Tsuki globally as an organization. Subsequently, Custodians rank above Supervisors, etc.

Done.

remove: "The Project Manager's decisions on project-related matters are final." I think the exhortation to respect the Project manager is actually more effective without this.

Done.

Information on Special Usergroups can be found here[link to page with definitions].

Done.

[stuff about licensed in the country of the server]

Shrugs. xD We found a linguistic flaw in TLG's common agreement. I think Misogi's suggestion was better, so I'll change it to Misogi's for now.

[stuff about guidelines for extra translations]

Agreed. If anything, it doesn't go on this doc. It would be a project-specific guideline.

Just a small correction.

You suggested the same thing Rydenius did earlier. It's already done.

[rydenius]

@Cloudii Much improved. Also Misgoi's suggested version for VI is a bit better than mine: "with regards to" -> "regarding". The first could be viewed as limiting Supervisor authority, while the second wouldn't have that disadvantage.

Wow, I had no idea that the "Formal Organization" page even existed. That sure worked out nicely. Btw, great work on that too, Cloudii!

Regarding:

IV. The Original Translator is to be regarded as the primary shareholder of a specific translation.
The Original Translator has the full right to withhold or remove his/her original translation(s) from the Wiki.
However, if the translation is to be eventually reposted elsewhere, all past contributors should be credited.

Is that a set-in-stone sort of thing? It's definitely a laudable and translator friendly policy, but could it be better to have a policy where submissions are donated to the community? I mean, it could be really frustrating particularly for editors and project managers who may have put in a lot of work on a project only to have sections of it wholesale deleted at a later date... Though that could open a whole other can of worms, not the least of which could be a taxable property gain for the site from contributed works (if they have realizable value)... Anyway, just thought I'd ask since it seems like it's something fundamental to TLGs and Onizuka-gto's vision for the community and I was curious about it.

Related to this (I might be stepping on a landmine here) is there (should there be?) a policy about original translators publishing contributed work commercially at a later date? (I think I remember some upset front page posting about something like that happening in the past, but didn't track down the details at the time since I was just a reader.)

On section I:

II. Under no circumstances would you submit works that are licensed and published in the server's (USA) and/or the submitter's language.

the new change isn't parallel in that "the server's" (missing word?) seems to be referring to location and "submitter's language" is referring to language. But the solution might have been inadvertently found. Does location matter, or is it just the languages that matter? For example if a novel was licensed in both English and Japanese in Japan, but not in English the USA, would it still be OK to post an [independently done] English translation of the Japanese work? Also there might be problems with "Submitter's language". What if the submitter is Japanese but submitting in English? That could be a problem since the original work is probably licensed in *his*(the submitter's) language.
Some possible directions for fixes:

II. Under no circumstances would you submit [translations of/translated(?)] works in a language for which they are [currently] licensed and published.

II. Under no circumstances would you submit [translations of/translated(?)] works where: 1.) the work is [currently] licensed and published in the country that the server is located in (USA), or 2.) the submitted translation is in a language that is [currently] licensed and published.

The second one would preclude other language translations for English works licensed in the USA though. But that could be fixed by making #2 an "and" instead of "or".

[onizuka-gto]

Please note, that when Baka-Tsuki materials are being reposted outside of Baka-Tsuki sphere, i request all incidents to credit "Baka-Tsuki.org" as the collective community, with addition http links, directly to the project page and if necessary the registration page.

this is because:
1. each project is a collaboration of many people. 2. This is the reason the registration page was create for and the listing of editors on the project index page. 3. I can't possibly remember all the translators and editors involved, hence just crediting Baka-Tsuki is easier. (<-main reason)

[cloudii]

Is that a set-in-stone sort of thing? It's definitely a laudable and translator friendly policy, but could it be better to have a policy where submissions are donated to the community? I mean, it could be really frustrating particularly for editors and project managers who may have put in a lot of work on a project only to have sections of it wholesale deleted at a later date... Though that could open a whole other can of worms, not the least of which could be a taxable property gain for the site from contributed works (if they have realizable value)... Anyway, just thought I'd ask since it seems like it's something fundamental to TLGs and Onizuka-gto's vision for the community and I was curious about it.

It was probably the easiest solution given the history of the community. Personally, I think we'd run into a big headache if we made a rule saying translators couldn't delete their translations (I imagine huge fights coming out of that). Hence, I favor this for practical reasons. I really don't like fights. QQ

Related to this (I might be stepping on a landmine here) is there (should there be?) a policy about original translators publishing contributed work commercially at a later date? (I think I remember some upset front page posting about something like that happening in the past, but didn't track down the details at the time since I was just a reader.)

Try and re-read the TLG agreement again and tell me what you think. ;D It's clear yet vague depending how you decide to read it.

II. Under no circumstances would you submit works that are licensed and published in the server's (USA) and/or the submitter's language.

the new change isn't parallel in that "the server's" (missing word?) seems to be referring to location and "submitter's language" is referring to language. But the solution might have been inadvertently found. Does location matter, or is it just the languages that matter? For example if a novel was licensed in both English and Japanese in Japan, but not in English the USA, would it still be OK to post an [independently done] English translation of the Japanese work? Also there might be problems with "Submitter's language". What if the submitter is Japanese but submitting in English? That could be a problem since the original work is probably licensed in *his*(the submitter's) language.
Some possible directions for fixes:

II. Under no circumstances would you submit [translations of/translated(?)] works in a language for which they are [currently] licensed and published.

II. Under no circumstances would you submit [translations of/translated(?)] works where: 1.) the work is [currently] licensed and published in the country that the server is located in (USA), or 2.) the submitted translation is in a language that is [currently] licensed and published.

The second one would preclude other language translations for English works licensed in the USA though. But that could be fixed by making #2 an "and" instead of "or".

To be perfectly honest, I'm just running off of TLG's agreement here. It's what it says. ;D I did reword it for you again though.

Please note, that when Baka-Tsuki materials are being reposted outside of Baka-Tsuki sphere, i request all incidents to credit "Baka-Tsuki.org" as the collective community, with addition http links, directly to the project page and if necessary the registration page.

this is because:
1. each project is a collaboration of many people. 2. This is the reason the registration page was create for and the listing of editors on the project index page. 3. I can't possibly remember all the translators and editors involved, hence just crediting Baka-Tsuki is easier. (<-main reason)

This is mentioned in the reader agreement. Leechers theoretically aren't supposed to be reading the contributor agreement.

-----------

Please Vote! 10 Yes's and we'll approve this.

[Misogi]

Just this change that Rydenius supported.

Wiki Supervisors have authority with regards to any global management issue.

[cloudii]

Just this change that Rydenius supported.

Wiki Supervisors have authority with regards to any global management issue.

I thought I changed it already?

[Misogi]

My bad, I meant "regarding".

[cloudii]

My bad, I meant "regarding".

done.

[rydenius]

Try and re-read the TLG agreement again and tell me what you think. ;D It's clear yet vague depending how you decide to read it.

The only confusion that I see is for Section C.1 and C.2 in the TLG agreement being separate, and with the allowances for the contributor being only in C.2. Reading this strictly, C.1 might preclude the entire Baka-Tsuki youtube project... Separating out "unless you(b3) are qualified as defined in (b2)." to "3. unless you(b3) are qualified as defined in (b2)." would resolve this issue. The only concern I have with this is "submitter" is not clearly defined. Though rules for valid submissions are defined in the Contributor Agreement (II, III, IV), so that might be ok...

As to my original question about commercial usage, it's likely a non-issue since the existing policy is for the translator to retain rights to his translation, and at the point the translator would be (legitimately) publishing commercially he'd either be the license holder or in a contract with the license holder... so the only issue would be precluding a translator from claiming someone else's work as his own, which is covered in TLG C.1, and Contributor Agreement section IV, so I guess that's ok as-is. It might get a bit messy with ownership of anonymous and non-anonymous edits, but that can probably be resolved directly with the Baka-Tsuki consul (for anonymous edits) and the known editors (for their edits).

Regarding the TLG agreement being linked from the Contributor Agreement, I notice there's a link at the bottom of the Contributor Agreement for it, but I wonder if that should be explicitly be linked as part of section I.

Sorry to still harp on section II, but it's the only section that I still have concerns with:

II. Under no circumstances would you submit translated works that are licensed and published in the language of the submitter or server (English).

I think one small change will keep it simple get us there though:

II. Under no circumstances would you submit translated works that are licensed and published in the language of the submission.

I think this is more inline with what I understand to be the intent of current policy.

It is different from (but possibly not incompatible with) the TLG agreement which only includes wording about location and English licensing. The relevant sections are:

d) "licenced" is defined as global and/or English publishing rights.

and

Under no circumstances would you(b2) 1. submit works(a) that are licenced(d) in the country the server and/or the submitter is located in.

If we construe "works" so that an English translation is a different licensed "work" from a (for example) German licensed "work" then that may resolve the issue even if we go back to using the original wording (taken from the TLG agreement) for section II of the Contributor Agreement, but with the original wording it also allows a loop-hole in that someone located in France could post a German translation even if the work is licensed in Germany, which I think is a bit problematic. But the rules on take-down on request of copyright/license holders still apply, so it may be a non-issue.

Is this something we should vote on?
A.) II. Under no circumstances would you submit translated works that are licensed and published in the language of the submission.
B.) II. Under no circumstances would you submit works that are licensed in the country the server and/or the submitter is located in.
C.) Something else. (Please specify)

Depending on how "works" is interpreted, I could be fine with the original wording.

[Misogi]

Here is what I'll propose.

II. Under no circumstances would you submit works that are licensed and published in the submitted language.