Subtitle ethics, rules, copying/editing/stealing

[rogard]

Hi all,

I am a regular user of OS for a while now, and I am admin at subscene as well. I have a few thoughts and questions about what I would call "Code of Honor" for subbers. I'd like to have your opinion about that.

1. You should never put your name on a subtitle you didn't make.

2. If you change something in an existing subtitle, leave the original credits untouched and add your name, clearly stating what you did exactly. (spell-checked/synced/formatted/completed/HI removed etc)

3. Don't annoy the hell out of the audience. Your name and any kind of advertising should never be on screen for more than a few seconds, and not more often than one or two times (beginning and end).

These points make sense, I think. Now for some unanswered questions:

a. Is it okay to upload subtitles from another site?

b. If you do that, how should you go about the credits? Should you say "uploaded by XXXX on [subtitle-site]"?

c. Do you think it's okay to edit existing subtitles in general? Is there something similar to a "copyright" or "ownership" for subtitles?

d. Should the subber mention if their work is based on somebody else's work, even if they only took the timing or text from an existing subtitle to use it as a base for a translation?

d. Should machine translations be deleted as soon as they are spotted or can anybody think of a useful application?

e. Aren't uploader highscore lists the wrong way to encourage good quality subtitles? Shouldn't there be a quality index instead of the # of uploads?

f. Is there something like a universal code of conduct for the subtitle community? I couldn't find anything on the web.

g. Is anybody here making subtitles for a living? I am just curious...

I've got tons of other questions, some have a moral or ethical background, others are of a more technical nature, but I don't want to overwhelm you guys. I think that the subtitle community is huge but rather unorganized - good or bad?

I am really looking forward to your opinions. If you have other rules or thoughts or questions about this topic, let's hear them.

LeapinLar, if you read this, I would love to read your opinion about all this...

Cheers,
and keep up the good work.

[LeapinLar]

rogard, below are my comments.

1. You should never put your name on a subtitle you didn't make.

Or improve by editing. I agree.

2. If you change something in an existing subtitle, leave the original credits untouched and add your name, clearly stating what you did exactly. (spell-checked/synced/formatted/completed/HI removed etc)

I agree.

3. Don't annoy the hell out of the audience. Your name and any kind of advertising should never be on screen for more than a few seconds, and not more often than one or two times (beginning and end).

I agree with this in general. I personally like credits only at the end.

a. Is it okay to upload subtitles from another site?

Yes, I think it's ok. Especially if there are no other good versions posted here. However, you should first check to make sure that that version is not already posted by someone else. OS will not let you post the exact same sub, but it only takes one character different for OS to let it be uploaded. What annoys me is when some people take my subs that I have painstakingly created and remove the credits and re-post on another site. Then someone else finds it and thinks it's a good sub and re-posts it here. It's still the same sub, but with the credits removed so OS lets it be uploaded. Sometimes they will add their own credits to it. That is REALLY annoying.

b. If you do that, how should you go about the credits? Should you say "uploaded by XXXX on [subtitle-site]"?

I'm not sure what to do here. Your suggestion has some merit.

c. Do you think it's okay to edit existing subtitles in general? Is there something similar to a "copyright" or "ownership" for subtitles?

I think it's ok to edit other subs, especially to correct mistakes or to re-time to another release. If you do, you should give credit to the original creator, if known. Most subs posted here are not created from scratch by the user (they are taken from a source like a subpack or DVD). Some are original (like an original translation or transcribed from listening). If they are, I think they do kind of "own" the sub and should have some rights to what's done with them. (Like having their credits in the sub and in the comment section of the upload.) But by posting them here, they may be giving up their "copyright".

d. Should the subber mention if their work is based on somebody else's work, even if they only took the timing or text from an existing subtitle to use it as a base for a translation?

They should mention if their work is based on someone else's work, but not if it's just timing or for translation.

d. Should machine translations be deleted as soon as they are spotted or can anybody think of a useful application?

The only use I can see for them is as a base for correction by someone else (timing or getting the general meaning of what's being said). I know it annoys a lot of people based on the number of comments posted by users. There were some users here who posted subs like those and put big warning comments not to download unless you were a submaker. Most users ignored those warnings and downloaded them anyway and then were angry and posted nasty comments to the uploader. I guess, after thinking about it, I would say to delete them right away. If submakers wanted a base for working from, they could make their own based on other language subs that are already posted. However, what some users call machine translations are really a manual translation or transcription by someone who does not have a full grasp of the language he is translating to or transcribing. It would be a shame to delete that person's hard work.

e. Aren't uploader highscore lists the wrong way to encourage good quality subtitles? Shouldn't there be a quality index instead of the # of uploads?

The subtitle rating system is supposed to be the gauge that users use to decide whether to download or not. OS recently eliminated anonymous ratings, which I TOTALLY agree with, so not as many subs are rated anymore. The sheer number of uploadings should not be a basis for deciding whether to upload that user's subs. Some users just find garbage from other sites and post them here in mass without checking the quality. I have seen some comments by users that say something like "this is a good sub, I can see why the uploader is a 'Gold Member'". 'Gold Member' has nothing to do with the quality of uploaded subs, just the number of uploaded subs.

f. Is there something like a universal code of conduct for the subtitle community? I couldn't find anything on the web.

I have never seen anything either. Maybe what you are starting will be a basis for that. Maybe if the operators of this site like what is being created here, they will post it somewhere here onsite as guidelines.

g. Is anybody here making subtitles for a living? I am just curious...

I doubt it.

I can't think of anything else to add to your list of comments and questions. Good start on a set of guidelines.

LeapinLar

[oss]

LeapinLar was the first. I must say I agree with him at least in 95%.

Problem about uploading, removing credits is...some children just dont care about this, remove all credits, puts own, and upload. We can discuss what is right, what is wrong, but there will be still some users, who will do this.

We can eliminate that by uploading only by registered users, but...it is worth of that ? It will ahve big impact, and I am against that.

[LeapinLar]

os,

I personally am against banning anonymous uploads. Too many good subs come in that way. And, frankly, a lot of my duplicate uploadings come from registered users anyway. I challenged privately one registered user for doing this and that person said they had never even thought to check what had been already uploaded by someone else first. I think in most cases it is an honest attempt to put good subs here without realizing what they were doing.

One of the issues with having a person check first is the automatic uploads with programs like AllPLayer. It just sends it and if there is not an exact match already uploaded, it uploads and OS accepts.

I don't know what the answer is. I think just a good set of guidelines will go a long way to stopping the problem.

[eduo]

The answer is, obviously, to store the subtitle not as a subtitle file but as the actual subtitle lines.

Subtitle records internally would store the lines and the hashes they've belonged to, so far. When requesting the subtitle you wouldn't get five options where two of them are the same subtitle but one included in a CD1 upload and another in a CD20 upload, while the other three are the same with a single line changed.

This would also pave the way to subtitle editing and format selection. You could select the format of the download and as long as at least one format has already been uploaded and interpreted the rest should be possible, to generate.

As for subtitle editing, this is what's needed to put OS on the level with sites like Wikititles or SubDivX, places superior to OS only because they allow the editing and refining of subtitles.

As for the process, the biggest hurdle is the subtitle interpretation library. After that it's trivial to store a subtitle with timings and deliver it as needed. You would still get different subtitles for differently-coded movies (as they could have different durations) but it would still provide a much better alternative.

Yes, that would mean converting a lot of OS from being a glorified file server based on metadata to an actual repository and versioning system for subtitles. I've been asking for TV-series support, which is brutally simpler, for more than two years without luck so I don't have much hope for a change like this to ever happen.

[rogard]

Thanks all of you for your comments so far. I am glad I am not the only one who finds the whole topic ...complex. I have to deal with these things every day as an admin, and therefore our admin team had to develop a shared point of view and a handful of rules to manage the chaos. What is right, what is in the gray zone and what is totally unacceptable. The foundation of all our doing is a single idea:
If someone spends countless hours on making subtitles as a free gift to the community, they deserve our respect and gratitude. It's the only reward they'll ever get. Nobody should take that away from them by stealing their work.
We actively enforce these guidelines, and many of the translators and subbers seem to approve of that. I think we created a certain feeling of "right" and "wrong" among our users. That doesn't mean that we don't have any problems all of a sudden, but people now started yelling at each other because of "violations of the rules" (before, they were just yelling at each other...)

I firmly believe that raising and creating awareness will lead many people to behave in a better way. It doesn't matter whether it's about subtitles or energy saving or keeping the peace with their neighbors. That's why I think a useful and clear-cut moral and ethical background for the whole subtitle community is so important. To make myself clear: I am not complaining about anything on your site, nor am I suggesting that something needs to be *done* or changed. Just wanted to know other admins' and users' opinion and hopefully get some new insight. (I already did, so thanks again)

BTW, almost a year back I made it my personal crusade to cancel anonymous rating on my site (because of the horrible abuse), and after a while I succeeded in persuading the team. I have to say, I don't miss anything because now the quality of the subtitles is mirrored more accurately by the ratings. Spam and revenge ratings are less of a problem now. People just tend to be more careful when everybody can see who they are...
We stopped uploads from anonymous users as well, with good success. I don't think we lost many uploads because of that.

One more thing about duplicates or dozens of slightly different versions of subtitles. Sorku from subtitlesource has a really nice approach to that on his site. Instead of having several similar subtitles for each film or series episode, he somehow chooses the best version. I don't know how it's done, but I like it a lot. In addition to that, a lot of care goes to the display and preservation of the translators' credits. I really like that too.

I am looking forward to reading more opinions.

rogard

[oss]

Eduo, TV series was almost done, when something bad happened, so I dont have energy to code all that stuff again, but I am finding it, believe me. It is on my high priority. Of course I am sorry it takes so long time.

For subtitle comparsion, I mean duplicates, I explained in another thread how it is done. I can make some automat stuff to remove "not so popular" subtitles, but it will always has some errors anyway. First, I can remove anonymous uploads, when there are uploads by registered users. I can compare number of downloads, also rating and so on, but someone have to suggest me some good rulez for that

For that comparsion of duplicates - I am doing fuzzy comparsion of text, so if there is 97% same, it is same subtitle, and it wont be uploaded (so it is not only hash anymore). This is done only for anonymous users.

Rogard, if you release some rulez, I am glad to put them here on website, and I think we can spread that rulez amongst other sites, so it will be like subtitle scene rulez. Ofcourse I agree with them, amongst all the thing you wrote in bold.

take care

[rogard]

Okay, I'm on it. Thing is, it's hard to make rules for our own site, so it's almost impossible to do that for this site (or others). I can just make suggestions and I'd like to have as much feedback as possible. Many questions remain unanswered: If you have rules, how do you go about enforcing those rules? Who says that these rules are good and binding for everyone? Is it the job of the admins to decide that? What will you do if people continue uploading thousands of duplicates or subtitles with removed translator's credits? Delete them? Ignore it? I can't answer that question for myself sometimes, and I certainly can't answer it for you guys. You gotta make your own rules if you feel the need.
Quite often, I find myself in a dilemma where I have to follow our rules even if that means that I have to delete a synced or improved subtitle just because the credits were missing. Does that make sense? What is all this about anyway? Is it about better quality subtitles or about respect for the creator of subtitles? Do those two things go together?
Should early versions of subtitles been deleted because now there is a better version available? Otherwise a user might grab the inferior one and that will ruin their movie experience?
I guess this topic will keep me occupied for a little while...

More comments appreciated, especially from "normal" users.

[eduo]

I won't lie to you. I don't especially believe in credits in Subtitles. Since the files are too simple and lack even the most basic metadata it's impossible to track the veracity of those credits.

To tell you the truth, I wouldn't be interested in hosting subtitles from people that demand to appear in credits. The video files themselves are usually anonymous and this has never posed a problem.

Let's be truthful here: We're talking about a legal gray area at best. According to some laws most of us are "stealing" (or at least "illegally copying") content. I don't have a problem with this and I have myself provided lots and lots of subtitles in the past (I used to work subtitling and dubbing professionally) so I can speak from first hand.

Let's be absolutely clear about this: If you demand credit you're missing the point of the "sharing". It's not a coincidence P2P sharing is anonymous (and not, it's not due to legal reasons).

I would strip credits right off every single subtitle I stumble upon (actually, OS once started including credits and it was finally decided this wasn't doing anyone any good) and just focus on increasing participation and quality.

I find it enormously more useful to have a subtitle editing and versioning system that allows subtitles to be written and improved without hosting dozens of versions. And to keep edits internally referenced as if it was a wiki with versioning. Credits would be *there*. When downloading subtitles it could be made mandatory to get a zipfile with an .nfo file or some other file that contains the actual, true credits.

I'm sorry, but including them in the subtitles themselves is an effort that makes no sense and all the biggest subtitle sites agree (since subtitles are a joint effort, most of the time).

I can't advocate nor support any initiative that means including data in subtitles that isn't an actual subtitle, up to and including subtitle website, subtitle translators, subtitle *team*, subtitle *fixer*.

I won't imply I'd have this information removed (although I would seriously consider it) but I'm sure as hell I wouldn't even suggest this is actually included.

(yes. I apologize, I'm pretty radical about what I believe to be nonsense and this looks very much like it. You can choose to ignore me, obviously)

[rogard]

Thanks for your feedback, eduo. It's not a problem for me that we disagree on some points, so there is no need to apologize. I am with you that it is difficult to keep the (correct) credits, but in my opinion that doesn't mean that it's wrong to try.

Subtitles might be simple files but they are a lot of work to do, as you know. It is certainly easier to rip a DVD than to create a subtitle. And if all the scene releases and many p2p film releases have a tag with the rls group or uploader nickname, I can't see why that should be impossible for subtitles. I'd say, 95% of all video uploads are not anonymous. The "scene" has very strict rules and it seems to work for them. Everybody who finds that silly is welcome to do so. You just continue uploading your subtitles without your alias or nickname on them.

I like your approach that in the end subtitles are a joint effort, and that it all should be solely about good quality that is shared throughout the community. Point is, if we could establish rules, I believe the quality of subtitles would improve drastically because this could be an incentive to work more, harder and better.
A version/revision system is basically doing the same: it's keeping track of the changes. Why not of who made them as well? You made this suggestion, and it is a brilliant one. But can you see that happen anytime soon? And since it doesn't exist so far, why should it be wrong to collect ideas about the whole thing. I think it's important to know what a thing has to be able to do before you start creating it. Again, I am all for a database and revision system for subtitles. Any volunteers?

You are probably aware that even retail subtitles often include credits who made them. Where's the difference? And what's the difference between film credits and subtitle credits? I know that film subtitles are in a gray legal area (well, maybe it's more like black...) and therefore there can't be a real "copyright" but the idea is the same. Somebody does some work and therefore puts their name on it: "I did this!" And as long as they don't display their name throughout half of the film, I am fine with that. If you don't like it, it takes 30 seconds to erase the credits before you watch the film. Not too much to ask.

You're right, it's all about sharing and contributing. That being said, that doesn't mean that it has to be anonymously. And "sharing" surely doesn't mean that anybody takes my work and claims they did it. They can have it and use it, share it, but it's still my work and my time that I've spent.

Since we don't get paid for our job, the only thing we get is this tiny bit of "fame", respect, gratefulness...whatever you want to call it. Why else do you think people make subtitles for free? Because the like doing it, because they're good at, because they want to help other people, and because sometimes somebody says "thank you."

[eduo]

A couple of things:

-Group-created subtitles, where versions and changes are tracked, are common already in several countries. Spain had wikitles (and variants of it) and SubDivX and I know about similar efforts in other countries and languages (I don't remember them off the top of my head as I only use english and spanish subtitles).

So yes, subtitles without credit, created by a group of users, in a wiki-versioning system, with full tracking, is a current reality and is the main source of quality subtitles in those countries it exists.

(incidentally, a lot of these subtitles are what ends up being sent as "individually created" subtitles by less scrupulous users)

-I don't ask for anonymity in subtitle creation. I ask for it in subtitle content, as a necessary consequence of the impossibility of controlling the actual authorship.

-I have been doing subtitles (professionally and by hobby) for over 15 years. They can be easy or hard, depending on the source content and possibility of automation. It's not really important whether it's easy or hard what I was talking about, but what the responsibility for it was. Ripping and sharing video is illegal in many places, creating and sharing subtitles isn't (yet!). It's harder to create a painting than to sell copies of other's paintings, but the latter is riskier.

-In reality, "Scenes" don't release to the public their releases. There are "Release Groups" that take the scene releases and make them publicly available. The "Scene" itself usually complains about this or ask their names to be removed (at least "officially", as there's a lot of childishness around).

This means that aXXXo only redistributes but they don't rip. The same as EZTV. There have been huge flamewars fought over this that are never resolved as all people involved is anonymous, so nothing can really be enforced. The main point is always attribution, as aXXXo or VTV get credit for distributing the work others risked creating.

-My subtitles used to have credits, and I asked to have them removed. Starting in 1994 no "official" subtitle in spanish has my name in them. This is because those credits don't belong there. They belong in a separate place where they are recorded and documented. Subtitles are not like books, where these notices can be read voluntarily. Subtitles actually affect the content being viewed and, as such, shouldn't contain any extraneous information.

-To be perfectly clear, take a look at veteran subtitle makers. They don't usually need to jump around saying "I did this!".

Also, I would be perfectly OK with "comments" in subtitles that don't appear in the video. Then it would become just a matter of unraveling the impossible problem of proper attribution. But since most subtitle formats don't support "comments" we don't have this option (no, putting the subtitle with 0 duration or after the end of the video causes too many problems with players to be useable).

Let me restate: I'm not against proper credit. I'm against putting it in the video by having it inserted in the text. And I'm generally against credit assigned where it can't be verified (this isn't a problem in versioning-based, community subtitle editors, where all changes are tracked appropriately).

In the end you'll all do whatever it is you want to do, I know that. We're not looking for consensus here. I just wanted to make it clear none of the stated arguments were obvious, logical or universal.

[rogard]

Good points you've got there. I need to think about what you said.

There is one thing though I'd like to say right away. You are a veteran and I am sure professional enough so that you don't need to jump around yelling "Me, me" which is great. But have you thought how a 16-year old might think about that when he or she just finished a subtitle after countless hours of hard work (and without having the experience and routine you have)?
It's a huge part of their motivation to be acknowledged, and I feel the same way to (albeit not in such a strong way since I am not 16 any more...)
It is the definition of being a veteran that you don't have to prove anything to yourself or others any more.

Again, thanks for your comment. I'll come back here later...if you don't mind.

[eduo]

Good points you've got there. I need to think about what you said.

There is one thing though I'd like to say right away. You are a veteran and I am sure professional enough so that you don't need to jump around yelling "Me, me" which is great. But have you thought how a 16-year old might think about that when he or she just finished a subtitle after countless hours of hard work (and without having the experience and routine you have)?
It's a huge part of their motivation to be acknowledged, and I feel the same way to (albeit not in such a strong way since I am not 16 any more...)
It is the definition of being a veteran that you don't have to prove anything to yourself or others any more.

Again, thanks for your comment. I'll come back here later...if you don't mind.

Think about it. What I propose is having real credit in the origination system. Not in the file itself where anyone with a text editor can remove it. If a 16-year old write a subtitle from scratch there is no way to distinguish it from another 16-year old's copy of that file with the credits replaced.

But if the subtitle was saved by the editor in a versioning system, there can be no discussion. The system is impartial.

[rogard]

Versioning system? Now that sounds brilliant. I don't have a clue how to do that though. A central database where subtitle makers upload their subtitles? How is that gonna work? As an addition to existing subtitle sites, or independently? Who's going to maintain that site? Who will pay for it, control it, who will program it? Any ideas? Volunteer web wizards, step forward please.

Maybe you're right: maybe it's downright pointless to try and protect something that is so easily manipulated. On the other hand, this is just a brainstorming, I am gathering information and insight about the whole matter of subtitles. Right now, I am not even sure that people are aware that subtitles should be seen as serious work and not as something that just pops up on the internet out of thin air.

[eduo]

http://subtitulos.es/

That is not the best site, but others are not available at the moment.

Click on any subtitle (try a popular series, like CSI 5x16: http://subtitulos.es/serie/CSI_NY/5/16/No_Good_Deed ). You'll see subtitles for each release out there (if there were repacks or PREAIRs you'd see them as well).

You can also see buttons to create a new translation (from the originally-uploaded) and credits (right down to the line each person has edited and the % of the subtitle each person is responsible for).

You can also see there can be language variants for the same subtitle and even local language variants (for example, Latin American Spanish vs. Castilian Spanish).

Quick translation:
Completado: Completed (no % means the file is officially closed now, although more edits can be made to it)
Descargas: Downloads
Secuencias: Lines in the subtitle.
Veces editado: how many times it's been edited.
Traducido por: Translated by
Comentarios: Comments
Ver y Editar: See and edit
Unirse a la traduccion: Join the translation team

Entering any subtitle ("Ver y editar") shows you the lines in the subtitle, and the versions ("V" column) for each line. And the translator for it.

This web is actually a sub-engine of the original wikitles that's now offline, where this engine was coupled with a full wiki for everything related to subtitles. So as you can see it is POSSIBLE to create better crediting without inundating the subtitle with credits or discussing whether those credits are valid or not.

Of course, this hasn't been tried by a large-scale site yet but it's a matter of going ahead and doing it. If an API is provided then other sites currently creating subtitles can plug into it and not lose any visits and do the edits for their own local language.

This is far from perfect but I thought I'd share it as there's this idea that this can't be done and it's clear it can, because it's being done *today*.

Incidentally, the source code behind this webservers is available (page in spanish, sorry):

http://www.wikisubtitles.net/blog/clone ... igo-fuente

If a large, multi-language site were to implement this I can't see how it could ever be a bad thing.

If it's implemented in a way that mirrors are supported to fall back on, all the better to support the disaster recovery.