Hi again,

maybe I didn't express myself clearly enough:
as I said, I was theorizing - it wasn't an opinon, but a possible
opinion. And of course the finished translation belongs to whoever paid
for the product, the tricky question is if the TM and the terminology
does so too. In the US, it seems you actually could patent the
electron... ;-). So where does general terminology start and
intellectual property end? I don't think we'll get a straight answer,
other than the one I (and others) offered: use trust and respect.

Using "special flavor terminology" for other customers than the original
one who paid for it would in my view be disrespectful, to make that
point clear.

Best regards,
Gudmund Areskoug

Suzanne Topping wrote:
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Gudmund Areskoug" <fta@...>
> >
> > Here we have another twist among the bends: Typically I am the one who
> > comes up with the swedish terminology, often making them brand-oriented
> > to give each customer their own special flavor in the market, but
> > stickin to a general teminology where it makes sense, so the end user
> > won't get flummoxed each time he/she changes product supplier. Well, in
> > these cases _I_ am the source, right? My customer should ask _my_
> > approval, before they let any other translator, or their headquarters in
> > the respective country use TM content or terminology containing _my_
> > work, right? Just theorizing, but I think it puts light on where the
> > limits are.
>
> Perhaps my outlook is American, because it seems that many of the
> translators I've talked to have a similar opinion to Gudmund's. But my
> experience says that if someone employs you to produce an item, the item
> belongs to them, not to you.
>
> I'll use as an example my former work as a tech writer. When a company
> contracted me to write a user's guide or other piece of work, the resulting
> documents belonged to them, not to me. I had no claim for who they asked to
> work on it in the future, and I'm sure that many pieces I wrote were later
> edited and updated by other writers without my knowledge or consent. I
> wouldn't expect to have to give it. I was hired to produce something for a
> client. The item I produced belonged to them, and was therefore theirs to do
> with as they chose.
>
>