Установить Steam
войти
|
язык
简体中文 (упрощенный китайский)
繁體中文 (традиционный китайский)
日本語 (японский)
한국어 (корейский)
ไทย (тайский)
Български (болгарский)
Čeština (чешский)
Dansk (датский)
Deutsch (немецкий)
English (английский)
Español - España (испанский)
Español - Latinoamérica (латиноам. испанский)
Ελληνικά (греческий)
Français (французский)
Italiano (итальянский)
Bahasa Indonesia (индонезийский)
Magyar (венгерский)
Nederlands (нидерландский)
Norsk (норвежский)
Polski (польский)
Português (португальский)
Português-Brasil (бразильский португальский)
Română (румынский)
Suomi (финский)
Svenska (шведский)
Türkçe (турецкий)
Tiếng Việt (вьетнамский)
Українська (украинский)
Сообщить о проблеме с переводом
Правила обсуждений
3 
Пожаловаться
I’m actually not. Do some research into how copyrights work in Japan. At the time Square was a Japanese company with an American office. The rights would have been filed in Japan.
You’re assuming the rest of the world operates like America.
In general, the GBA translation is said to be the superior translation anyways. Not a reflection of Woosley's work just times have changed and translations are under far less constraint than they originally were. So they'll probably, to that extent, use the gba translation regardless of the rights involved.
As close as I can find, employees used to have ownership of new invention patents in Japan. But the law changed in 2015, and new patents would be owned by the employer first.
I can't find any differences in Japan's work for hire rules vs the US, and despite what the other post insinuated, Woolsey was an employee of Square Soft, not Square, so US work for hire laws would apply. Square Soft, Inc is also the corp that was *not* dissolved during the Enix merger, and became Square Enix, Inc. There no issues with continuity of ownership, SE owns Woolsey's scripts.
This is also off, there's a new provision to the author's rights laws that allows a government made agency to handle gratuities instead of dealing with lengthly rights negotiations if the company in question can prove reasonable need for the assets involved. Essentially they pay a fee and if the author asks for the money, the agency pays out for them.
But yeah, seeing as that only covers everything after 2015... a script written in the 90s wouldn't be covered by the change either.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_law_of_Japan
Read over Author's Rights. And you're right, no issues with continuity of ownership, Woosley is still very alive.
Woolsey was never an employee of a Japanese company. Square Soft Inc, and Square Enix Inc as it's known today, has always been a US corporations. An employee of a subsidiary is not an employee of its parent corp.
If you look into Woosley's work, which he was in fact under the company in the US, he flew out to Japan to do a majority of his translation work at the Japanese Corporate HQ.
His paychecks were cut in America, his work was actually done with the Japanese side of the company. I could also point out that as an American branch this technically makes the rights issues even more complicated, SS inc was not strictly a company that worked for Squaresoft, they also did work for several other companies via term contract, such as Capcom. One has to wonder how those rights magically extended to Square Europe if Square Soft Inc was actually an independent holding as you defined it.
In terms of FF3 US (FF6), SS Inc served only as a publisher, not the developer. Check the credits. I promise you Ted Woosley did not insert his script into the game itself, it had to pass through the Japanese arm of the company. Today there's only around 3 people in the USA who can even do that job, he's not one of them.
My tl;dr: Squaresoft had some crazy screwed up legal setup when it came to their international holdings. Assuming that the American branch magically had full rights to Squaresoft Japan's works because someone who worked on the game cut their paychecks with them is a vast misunderstanding of how copyrights work internaitonally, especially when run through the strainer of 30 years of corporate restructuring.
Most subsidiaries are still corporations. Some are partnerships, or LLCs. We know in this case, that Square Soft Inc, is a corporation, because the name includes Inc. All being a subsidiary means, is that a parent corp owns a majority of the stock. The subsidiary corp still has it's own board of directors, and it's own employees, owns it's own assets, and has it's own revenue and expenses. Assets don't transfer to the parent company, unless the parent company buys them. Hell, even money only flows to the parent company when the board of the subsidiary votes to pay dividends on profits.
I have been a tax preparer and bookkeeper for 16 years. Part of my job is filing Articles of Incorporation to assist my clients. I constantly have to give explanations like the above. Just because you own a corporations stock, does not mean you own the corps assets.
Temporary work assignments to Japan doesn't alter Woolsey's tax home, or the nature of his work. His translations were done as an employee of a US corp, under US work for hire laws, which would be honored in Japan by treaty, the rights for his work remain with his US employer.
This is actually where things get super iffy.
This entire argument 100% depends on HOW he was employed with the company. As almost every inch of that law only covers regularly employed individuals. As a tax preparer, I'm shocked you didn't consider that Woosley could have been a contractor. Work for Hire depends fully on the employee agency.
Is this a detail we're aware of or do we have to make an assumption? Realize my entire point is on possibility, not certainty. Otherwise I totally see your point.
Woolsey was not a contractor. He didn't have enough control over his work to not be an employee. He also worked exclusively for Square Soft, Inc during the period, again making it extremely unlikely he was a contractor. Nor would he have had to resign when Square changed it's US headquarters in 1996 as a contractor, because his relationship with Square would have ended when he completed Chrono Trigger otherwise. Even if he was mis-classified as a contractor, his work would have fallen under Work for Hire; see: Kirby, Jack.