Legal Tools Translation/4.0/Russian
Armenia, Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Russia, Ukraine
Russian language is used (or can be used) by the other jurisdictions, such as Armenia, Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Ukraine. As we also know, there is an emerging CC team in Belarus. The Russian draft of CC 4.0 was sent to the above-mentioned jurisdictions' teams for their comments and suggestions. Comments from these teams were collected, discussed and integrated into the draft (where possible).
CC0: Not started.
First draft was submitted: 27 June 2015
Public comment period: 6 October 2015 -
Translation officially published: 9 April 2018 (read the announcement on the CC blog)
- Mr. Yuri Hohlov - Public Head
- Mr. Alexander Evtyushkin - Expert
- Ms. Louisa Rizmanova - CC Russia Project Manager
- Mr Alexander Generalov -translator - from IIS
- Mr. Michael Yakushev - Legal Head
- Ms. Svetlana Vorozhbit
- Mrs. Elena Voinikanis
- Ms. Natalia Sorokina
- Mr. Maksym Naumko
- Mr. Vitaly Kalyatin
The translation draft was reviewed by:
- Mrs. Tatiana Ershova
- Mr. Nikolay Dmitrik
Requests for feedback on public comment were sent on 12/16/2015. On 05/12/2016, emails were sent to CIS countries where Russian is spoken, to have one last final review of the draft. A great number of comments to the translation was provided by Maxim Naumko (CC Ukraine). Maxim has participated actively in the process of the final translation of the 4.0 version into the Russian language. Svetlana Vorozhbit has also actively worked on the text at the same period. Though it was planned to complete the work until the end of 2016, the process of translation has been at last finalized during summer 2017 because of the busy schedules of some participants. A great support related to the adaptation of the approaches to the Russian context was provided by the Association of Internet-publishers (Ivan Zasursky, Vladimir Haritonov), Non-commercial Partnership “Wikimedia.Ru” (Stanislav Kozlovsky), UNESCO bureau in Russia (Badarch Dendev, Director of the bureau, and Svetlana Knyazeva).
Key translation decisions and challenges
The translation of 4.0 was performed after coming in force of the article 1286.1 of the Russian Civil Code which created the definition of the open license. Prior to that, the legal regime analogical to the creative commons has been never defined. Not only the users of creative commons but also the community of free software became the beneficiary of the new article. As copyleft licenses, such as GNU GPL, have a long history of translation into the Russian language also, there was an effort in the process of translation to put the legal instruments 4.0 in the context of the article 1286.1 of the Russian Civil Code and translation of the licenses used for free software.
Besides that, a serious challenge to the process of the translation was the need to apply its result not only in Russia but in the other jurisdictions as well. The terminology of the Russian laws is different in some details from the Russian language terms and expressions in other countries (for example, the definition of the “license” can be referred both to the license agreement and to the right of use arisen from it). With the regard to that, the most common words and expressions were used in the translation.
Individual terminology issues
Some of the most important individual terminology and phrase choices:
- ‘share’. The word-for-word translation of the term “share” is ‘podelitsya’, which means literally ‘to let somebody use the same object’. This term is not common in the intellectual property laws of Russia and in the other jurisdictions. Because of that, it was decided to use the term ‘predostavlenie’ (which means literally ‘dissemination’) in order to make and adequate translation of the term ‘share’. This term is enshrined in the laws of all the jurisdictions in the meaning as nearly as possible to the term ‘share’.
- ‘in consideration’. This term is used exceedingly rare in the sphere of intellectual property because the “consideration conception” in general is underdeveloped in Russia. However, it was decided in the process of translation to use the term ‘vstrechnoe predostavlenie’ especially in order to accentuate the bilateral character of the legal relations arisen from the license. This term is known to the legal science and claimed to be the best possible translation of the term ‘consideration’. In the other cases, there were not any terminological difficulties or they had a simple solution. It reflects the fact of maximum convergence between the Russian legislation on intellectual property and the contemporary documents in the copyright sphere.
Draft translation files
FINAL translation files