[kevingadd]

Are you saying it's a bad thing if the creator of a work decides they want it localized or dubbed into other languages? I don't understand why you want to take that choice out of their hands.

Which languages someone speaks isn't simply a matter of "individual preference". Learning a new language takes a lot of time and energy, and people only have the time to learn a handful of languages in most cases unless they can make a career out of linguistics.

i.e. I know a sprinkling of words in various languages, and I've started learning Japanese, but I simply don't have the time to also learn Mandarin, Korean, Cantonese, etc. So I appreciate it when authors of works in those languages offer localizations into a language I can speak, or when third parties spend their time translating stuff for free to make it available to a wider audience.

What's the advantage of closing knowledge and communication off from a wider audience?

Maybe I'm misunderstanding and you're just angry about Google Translate/DeepL etc (which I have a strong distaste for since they're Fake)

[skeledrew]

Nah the localization itself is fine. Where it becomes problematic is when there's no opt-out at the app level. Or perhaps it should even be opt-in.

[CaptainFever]

Opt out? Do you mean you want content creators to be able to ban certain texts from being translated? That sounds like a terrible idea.

[Am4TIfIsER0ppos]

No. The parent means that software and media should not only be available in French in France, for example. French produced things can be in French in France but GGP is talking about American services like google which used to always default to French for me and be resistant to changing.

But also yes a creator should be able to ban translations.

[pjc50]

> software and media should not only be available in French in France

Seems reasonable. However, given French media quotas e.g. https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/music/news/... , companies may be providing stuff only in French to ensure that it meets a legal requirement.

> But also yes a creator should be able to ban translations.

We've been round and round this for at least twenty years; creators like being able to ban accessibility measures like "read aloud this document" or "display it in a more readable format" or "fix the audio mix so the dialogue is audible" or "buy the DVD from a different country", but that's not exactly welfare-maximising. Are translations an accessibility measure? What about a translation into ASL?

(on the other hand, the reputational risk of a poor translation is real, and in the extreme can result in someone being cancelled for something they never even wrote)

[Am4TIfIsER0ppos]

I don't mean you should be technically prevented from performing a translation, edit, or filter on something you own. I mean creators should be able to prevent the publication of a translation whether that is a different language, subtitles, or signing through the usual copyright mechanisms.

[bdzr]

I'd never heard this before, but it's really interesting. This reminds me a lot of when Hollywood tried (successfully?) to bully Netflix out of adding a playback speed button. I'm not sure to what extent creators should be allowed to control how people consume their media.