Legal Position

The secondary status of the translator in the Anglo-American world is reflected in her legal status too. Venuti points out that British and American law defines translation as adaptation or derivative work based on “an original work of authorship” and the copyright for adaptations is vested with the author (8). According to this, the author can control the publication of translations during the term of the copyright, which is the author’s lifetime plus fifty years. But authorship is “defined as the creation of a form or medium of expression, not an idea, as originality of language, not thought” (9). So British and American law allows the copyright of a translation to the translator, “recognizing that the translator uses another language for the foreign text and therefore can be understood as creating an original work. In copyright law, the translator is and is not an author” (9).

British and American law give the translation copyright to the translator, but the control over the translation rests with the author.  According to the Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works, authors are given the control over translations in Britain and America. This holds good even if the authors are foreign nationals and the translators are not. This also means that the authors are entitled to legal protection in these countries while translators are not. The ‘is and is not an author’ status of the translator is emphasized by the Berne convention clause: “Translations, adaptations, arrangements of music and other alterations of a literary or artistic work shall be protected as original works without prejudice to the copyright in the original work” of the author (qtd in Venuti 9). It goes on to specify that the author “shall enjoy the exclusive right of making and of authorizing the translation”(9).This is the law in India also. The translator is seen as somewhat less than the author, despite the awards given to the best translator by the Sahitya Akademi and other institutions in India.