Peter Leeflang wrote:
Now, for the first time, I encounter a translation agency that is interested in working with me on medical translations, but it claims in its contract that the translator does not own the copyright of the translation.
Perhaps they mean "the translator agrees to assign the copyright" and not "the translator has no copyright".
So my question is if the non-ownership approach that this agency has, is normal and generally accepted.
I think it is generally accepted and does occur in various guises, but I think the intention of the clause is that the translator assigns the copyright to the client at the time of delivery. It is generally assumed that the client will pay for the translation, too. However, there is often a lag of a month to three months between delivery and payment, and the client may wish to use the translation immediately after delivery. How would you normally solve that?