Translations Security

Posted September 23rd, 2017 by Suzy

The author is the only person empowered to authorize such changes in their creation, with or without profit. Violations of intellectual property rights can be pursued by the holders of such rights or legally constituted management entities, and such persecution can be done through both professional and civil. The first requires the concurrence of profit and the injury of others, but not civil proceedings requires proof of causation of harm or profit to the offender, but only the existence of the infringement.

Therefore, even if the website where they publish the transformation of the work is without profit, and in the same category are the contributions of users, this activity has legal implications, and the offender may have to compensate holders of intellectual property rights of the work with an amount equal to the profit that the owners would have earned absent the unlawful use, or the payment corresponding to authorization, as appropriate, and that authorization has occurred. Apart from the liability they incur as the user LPI author of the uploaded file or the script translated subtitles, in the light of Article 16 of the LSSI is considered offender (and holders of intellectual property rights have an action against him ), the administrator of the site (such as “service provider hosting or data storage) it is proved that he was informed that he uploaded to the website was an illegal or harmful content of third party rights, unless he proves that he had no actual knowledge that the activity or the information stored is unlawful or harms property or rights of a third party liable for compensation, or who acted swiftly to remove or block access to them, ie prevent harm to the copyright. Not for nothing stated in Article 1902 of Civil Code: “the act or omission that causes harm to another, intervening fault or negligence, is obliged to repair the damage. “

According to Article 16 of the LSSI means that the provider has actual knowledge that” when a competent authority has declared the illegality of the data, requested their withdrawal, refused access to them, or else declared the existence of the injury, and the provider knew the appropriate resolution. Kidney Foundation describes an additional similar source. “Until there is an adequate and convenient for authors to allow users to change such altruistic, non-profit, with an informative effect of his work and made available to the public, not only for private use of the user who performs any transformation of this type require the approval of all holders of intellectual property rights of the work concerned..

Comments are closed.