Slashdot Mirror
Do You Own Your Native Language?
l2718 writes "In a new take on the reach of 'Intellectual Property,' the Mapuche Indians of Chile are accusing Microsoft of linguistic piracy. Their lawsuit alleges that Microsoft needed permission from the tribal elders before translating its software into Mapuzugun, a project which was co-ordinated with the Chilean Ministry of Education." From the CNN Money article: "The Mapuche took their case to a court in the southern city of Temuco earlier this month but a judge ruled it should be considered in Santiago. A judge in the capital is due to decide in the next two weeks whether Microsoft has a case to answer. 'If they rule against us we will go to the Supreme Court and if they rule against us there we will take our case to a court of human rights,' said Lautaro Loncon, a Mapuche activist and coordinator of the Indigenous Network, an umbrella group for several ethnic groups in Chile."
Be right back, about to file a language patent for "English"
I'm not sure what to think of this. On one hand, any large, common language can reasonably expect to be used by any corporation or person world wide.
On the other hand, though, if this is a small tribe and they only teach the language to other tribe members, and Microsoft intends to make a profit off using this language, then maybe it is some sort of "human rights" issue.
Kllskjlf KJkJLFKJG L S jksldjl!! ; lkj flkjLk!: JF; kj
The actual name of the language is Mapudungun.
Can Jim Henson sue Google over their option to translate to Swedish Chef?
Bork bork bork!
Would you kindly mod me +1 insightful?
the absurdity of the contemporary take on IP, and perhaps the idea behind is to demonstrate this.
To me, a language clearly is in the public domain.
CC.
TaijiQuan (Huang, 5 loosenings)
The actual name of the language is Mapudungun.
Clearly they got it wrong to avoid being dragged into court. You, on the other hand, have opened yourself to a lawsuit!
Someone should sue them for using English. What the hell is their problem ?
My initial reflex would be to say that you cannot own a language. Then again, however, what if you invented a language? What if I wrote a book claiming that I invented Elvish? Could whoever holds the copyright for Tolkien's work sue me?
And what about accents? If I start using an accent on a show, and it begins to be associated with me. Then, someone else uses it. Can I sue them?
I am not sure, but I think that the answer is this:
A language is a way for people to communicate. That is, it is a system known to both of them, using which they can send each other messages. One can patent such a system to prevent others from using it. I am not sure, but I do not think that the tribe patented their language. Therefore, I doubt that they have any grounds on which to sue.
The iffy area, of course, is when does one have to pay royalties? If I create a language, patent it and teach it to you, and then, you teach it to your friend, do you or he have to pay me royalties? Here, I am not sure.
I, for one, WELCOME our new NgeMimbwa Overlords.
In Soviet Russia, the Language Manag'hwhabwa's YOU!
My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
called "human female", please, please, PLEASE release it into the public domain so the rest of us can maybe hope to understand it!
Monstar L
To me, language is just as intangable as thoughts, ideas, and concepts.
Perhaps it would fall under the guise of 'Trade Secret' rather than be copyrighted...
DEAD DEAD DEAD DELETE ME
When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
Sorry, but that's the first thing that sprung to mind. If I were running MS and some "tribal elders" pitched a fit about us supporting their language, I'd say "Ok, have it your way. We'll see if your language stlll exists in another fifty years."
-jcr
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
What is the very essence of human civilization? What is our culture? I would say that the spoken and written language is at the very heart of things, if not the most important aspect. As such it should be free for anyone to use for any purpose.
Sure, small tribe stand up against the shade business practitioners that is Microsoft. You really *want* to be on the side of the tribe, but this time I think they are wrong. Besides, I don't think they would really care if someone else used their language, someone who doesn't have a boatload of money that is.
But the question was "can you own your NATIVE language ?". Obviously you didn't invent it. People taught it to you. Why should you have any rights to it, other than the right to use it ?
So let me see if I get this straight -- the Mapuche tribal leaders are making the claim that Microsoft needs their permission to use a language because, well, they say they own this language? OK... later on in the article, a Mapuche leader makes the claim that he's afraid that their language might become like Latin, i.e. spoken and read only in universities, but that the solution to the problem is to make Mapuche an official state-sponsored language, alongside Spanish. Pardon me, but that objective seems diametrically opposed with the current legal action against Microsoft. Preventing Microsoft from incorporating Mapuche into Windows does nothing but retard the usefulness of the language, or am I missing something? It certainly opens up a whole can of questions about a state's sponsoring a language, but only to a select group of people, with control held by a tiny group of non-state leaders. Where's the sense in that idea? Where's the logic? Are these guys simply smoking some kind of native herb that I've never heard of, because that's the only 'logic' I can see in this whole silly situation
I suspect that the tribal leaders have another agenda here, namely fleecing Microsoft out of a few bucks for the right to incorporate the Mapuche language into Windows. That idea I can understand, even if I don't support it. It will be interesting to see what the Chilean courts decide. On one hand, there's a cash-cow opportunity for them to make a ruling that will benefit a group of Chileans by thumbing their noses at one of the richest companies in the world. On the other hand, it sets a bad precedent for businesses, and I wouldn't even want to think about the lost economic opportunities a ruling for the Mapuche might have.
One thing's for sure -- remind me not to go to Chile with my camera. God forbid I should snap a photo and deprive these people of their right to control their cultural heritage or something. Hell; they they sound like the kind of people who might believe that I'm stealing their souls when I take a picture. I guess those beautiful llama photos will just have to wait till next year.
Yeah, it looks like someone could claim ownership of l33t talk.
[Readies the knuckles]
And will therefore be responsible...
On the surface, it may seem quite absurd. However in TFA, I couldn't find any specific mention of the motives behind the Mapuche council's objection. Note that Mapuche leaders do not necessarily represent the will of every member of the tribe. However if we assume that there is support from the general populace, my guess would be that:
1. The Mapuche and Andean people have a history of being lied to and manipulated by the Chilean government, usually in the interest of integrating them more within the European society and economy, often resulting in people being forcibly removed from their ancestral home territory so the land can be exploited for corporate gain. As a result there could be a general distrust for any type of corporation, especially those from the US. Mining and logging companies, for example, have been a major cause of displacement and environmental destruction, which has deeply affected the sentiments of native peoples toward capitalistic enterprise.
2. There is a fear of the bastardization of their language by Microsoft incorporating and "standardizing" it. It could be that many are satisfied using Spanish language software from Microsoft.
3. Remember that traditionally the native people of South America have a completely different world view from those of European descent. Society, religion, economy, technology are all perceived differently. It may be that the people actually don't want the opportunity of being exposed to this software in their native language. We may think it's "what's best for them," but really how can you or I decide that? The history of doing what we think is best for an indigenous culture of the Americas has been that of moving them into our world without really understanding that they may really want to keep their way of life, and "progress" as we often define it (e.g. technology) is really not beneficial from their perspective.
To many, this may seem arrogant, or a grab for money. Without hearing a proper explanation of the motives behind this resistance, I feel nothing can be concluded. I think it's important to realize that other cultures view the predominant society from a different perspective and may see further integration as a threat to their way of living.
What if Micky$oft hadn't included Mapudungun as a language option?
What repercussions of anti-Mapudungun fudd would we be seeing? Would the story read, "Microsoft sued for racial profiling against the Mapuche?" Would we also see quotes from the Mapuche tribe saying, "Microsoft is nothing more than language bigots for not recognizing our people, and their language as part of the human race?"
Either way, I'm not surprised this story came about, and I won't be surprised if it happens again in the future. One way or another, I can't help but think this all boils down to...money.
Shane
So let me see if I get this straight -- the Mapuche tribal leaders are making the claim that Microsoft needs their permission to use a language because, well, they say they own this language?
I'm inclined to believe you haven't gotten it straight, because (a) the article is short in details, (b) it's a popular press article, and of course the popular press is well-known for not being extremely accurate.
Presumably we can believe the article that the Mapuche tribal leaders are suing Microsoft. What I'm not so quick to conclude (as most responders here just went ahead and assumed) is that this is framed as an intellectual property case. It could be framed as a human rights case, and in fact, the article does say that the Mapuche grievance is the fact that they were never consulted on anything in the process.
Indeed, the article does mention the possibility of taking this to an international human rights court:
In any case, you are blindly applying your own cultural standards to a set of people who likely do not share them. In particular, you believe that by default, anybody has a right to any piece of obtainable knowledge, with some specific exclusions (e.g., privacy, confidential business information). This cultural assumption is not shared by every group in the world; people in some groups assume just as irreflexively that only some people are entitled to some kinds of knowledge (for example, only members of a certain caste may be entitled to know how to play some instrument). In this case, then the human rights issue has to do with mediation between the standards of two cultures when they clash; the Mapuche will claim that officialdom ought to respect their culture's standards.
Note that all I've said is every bit as much speculation as what you've said. But it should at least demonstrate that this issue is likely very, very subtle. Discussing issues like this fruitfully requires an amount of cultural insight and sensitivity that most people simply lack.
Are you adequate?
I guess we might me loosing the spiritual side of this story. These people might very well take as a sacrilege that fact that an "evil" company will profane their sacred language for an "evil" computer program. They're testing the legal way first.
Even if the language was copyrighted or patented, it would have expired already. The court should tell them to STFU.
---------
There is inferior bacteria on the interior of your posterior.
OK, well...
... hope that helps.
"lets just be friends" translates to "jump off a cliff and commit suicide"
"I seek a man who is kind with a big heart" translates to "I seek a man who is rich with a big wallet"
"can we talk" translates to "you're in deep shit and you're gonna get it"
"this is cute" translates to "give me the dough, now!"
"we feel..." translates to "I'm gonna make you feel..."
"marrage" translates to "on a tight leash"
Yu netives spek einglish bad. We estudients of einglish speik einglish best.
Who's to say that these 'tribal leaders' speak for everyone using the Mapuche edition of Windows?
I doubt they do. What I'm trying to do is to state as strong a case for them as possible; as opposed to what most people in this thread are doing--dismissing them offhand on the basis of things they likely didn't claim. (Or in other words: I'm interested in understanding the way they think, and not at all propping up my ego by making them look like dumbasses.)
Yes, their actual argument (which we do not know, let me remind us) possibly assumes that the Mapuche is a uniform culture (at worst), or that their traditional authorities are entitled to make some decisions about how their language is to be used (at least). It is likely that it also glosses over the fact that we, as Westerners, may judge a lot of their traditional institutions as opressing some segments of their society (e.g. women), and it is quite likely that some (if not many) of their own constituents would agree with us (but which still doesn't mean that they'd like us to impose our cultural standards on them; they may want to reform their own culture).
Still, the point is that this issue will no doubt turn out to be very subtle, that it will require a good amount of anthropological sophistication to understand it, and that the discussion here is sorely lacking such sophistication.
Are you adequate?
I may be "anthropologically unsophistocated", but I understand basic human nature.
Yes, if you believe in "basic human nature," you are indeed anthropologically sophisticated.
If I were Microsoft, this is what I'd do: I'd shelve the project. Then if the tribal leaders decide they want an OS in their own language, they can make a request. But when you make a request of someone, it's silly to expect them to do it free of charge.
Their biggest complaint, as far as I can make it, is that Microsoft teamed up with the Chilean government to produce this translation, and did not consult them at all on it. The best I can state their case so far is as follows:
Or in other words, that if anybody has a claim on making official decisions about how their language is to be used software work, it is them, and not the Chilean government, and that Microsoft wronged them by going with the Chilean government.
Note that this issue may have legal implications: for example, if somebody tomorrow passes a law that has clauses that hinge on whether some service or product is offered in a native language, then the issue arises of judging whether a particular product or case is in fact offered in the Mapuche's language. Now there is an issue as to who should have the authority to make such decisions or to set the standards under which such decisions are to be made.
Are you adequate?
Likewise, no tribe, no people, no government has the right to dictate how a language should be used.
Why do you assume that this is what they're trying to do?
Let's do a hypothetical scenario: the Chilean government tomorrow passes a law that offers tax incentives to businesses that offer products in indigenous languages. Microsoft has something they claim is a Mapuzugun translation of their software, and they apply for the tax break. Who gets to decide whether in fact the product is in Mapuzugun? Or alternatively, what stops Microsoft from claiming a tax break on a Mapuzugun "translation" that no actual speaker can in fact use, because it is atrociously bad?
Clearly, one wants to be able to standardize the language to some degree in order to be able to evaluate these issues, and in general, to offer guidance to people who want to make such translations so they have something to shoot for. Now, who gets to decide what those standards should be?
In other words: I claim that the issue here is about who a word into what constitutes the Mapuzugun language for official purposes. This is of political importance because if the wrong people get to control those decisions, then people or businesses can claim to have offered "Mapuzugun" products or services that should in fact not be considered so.
Are you adequate?
Can't Microsoft just rename the language option "Mooboo", then add a bunch of new words and grammatical constructs to the language? That's what they do with everything else.
This is not so simple as some people want to see it. It's not just Mapuche people vs Microsoft, but about the way the Chilean government handles things concerning the Mapuche culture and how, from the POV of the Mapuches, the government's decisions are unfair, not good for them, etc. It's also important to have in mind that the Mapuches are known for their fierce spirit. And not just in this case. Whenever something they consider important is at stake, like their territories, this fierce spirit comes to light. It doesn't surprise me to see that they are handling this problem this way, it's pretty consequent with the way they have handled their other problems so far. I believe this is another chapter in the constantly struggling relationship between the government and the Mapuches. That Microsoft is between it's just one small part of a much bigger and complex story.
Brings new meaning to free as in speech.
Ask permission from whom? They had permission from a government agency. How many people need to approve it? And wouldn't a language be in the public domain? Certainly everyone that inveted it is long dead. So, they took something that is not copyrighted, not trademarked, not patented, and had governmental approval, and you are telling them they did it wrong?
Learn to love Alaska
Mapuche community couldn't care less about Gates' money. The real reason to present the Protection constitutional action they filed in the Temuco's Court of Appeals, is simply that neither Microsoft nor the Chilean government consult them on the topic of the prospected translation. No, isn't also a matter of pride or even intellectual property, the point is that mapuzungun is a language that has various forms or even dialects. the introduction of an operative system that takes one of the many postures on grammar or one set of expressions over the others it's a very strong influence that jeopardizes the idiom's formalization process. One example: the idiom it's called mapuzungun by some, but mapudungun by the vast majority of mapuche people. So guys, it's no so stupid after all, does it? Remember we're talking here of the people that kicked spanish army's arse for three hundred years, using sticks and rocks... they got to fight back, it's on their DNA!! Greetings from Chile
The UK Language Ministry admitted in response to questioning that it was investigating the possibility that pirated copies of English may have been exported to the US, Canada and New Zealand in previous centuries. 'All we are interested in doing' said a spokesperson 'is making sure our citizens get the proper returns on their intellectual property' She went on to explain that the UK had devoted millions of man years of development into raising English to its present expressive levels from its Germanic, Anglo Saxon and Norman roots.
She agreed that what was probably needed was a test case to clarify the matter. 'We would pick some arbitrary person, like a mother in Kalamazoo, who has been observed and recorded teaching her child an illegally copied version of our language. Then we will sue the hell out of her. Win or lose, that will encourage others to pay proper royalties to the UK, and ensure that further development of our language can be properly funded'.
Think before you mod. Adding inflections left and right does not archaic English make.
Is a little weird... "How dare you translate something, without paying us, for the privilege of us being able to understand it!"
They should just boycott it by not reading the version that's translated for them to understand. Or MS could just bitchslap them back by "mis"translating the yes/no text on the "really format harddrive that's now 90% full?" dialog box.
Just cuz MS is greedy, doesn't make other peoples greed any less um... greedy...
The revolution will not be televised... but it will have a page on Wikipedia