To think translators shouldn't be paid royalties?

[Thisfeelslikearipoff]

I'm a published author and one of my books is about to go into another language. This book has been published in several languages already and I am familiar with the international translation process. To my astonishment, for the first time, this translator has tried to make her being paid royalties from book sales a part of her contractual agreement.

My immediate instinct is that no, she shouldn't be claiming royalties here. That is not to diminish her role in any way; I fully acknowledge the effort involved in translating thoughts and concepts from one language to another, and I fully acknowledge the obviously crucial nature of the translators role in a translation. A translation involves several individuals and entities doing their part in a professional manner. There is the author, the translator, the publisher, the distributor, the PR and media company etc etc. Everybody's role is crucial.

After I got this request I did some research and found that yes, for some people this actually is a thing, and I even came across a bizarre argument on a translators website where translators were forcefully asserting that they ought to be "fighting for our rights" to be paid royalties on book sales!

My take on it is this - the translator deserves to be properly compensated for their work, but only once. I really am feeling put out by this, and honestly the financial aspect is the least of what bothers me. I am annoyed that she feels she has a right to royalties on my work. She did not come up with these thoughts and concepts; her role is to bridge the gap between one language and another. AIBU to think she shouldn't be paid royalties on each copy sold?

This is a bit of a niche question isn't it? A quick google suggests that translators can expect between 1 and 3% of royalties...

It's not really about opinion is it? It's about what's usual in the industry.

It also seems like you don't value a translator's skills tbh. Not only do they have to be completely fluent in two (or more languages), ,they have to preserve the lyricism and nuances of the original text, understanding instinctively what works in one language and what doesn't. Idioms alone are a minefield. I think what they do is amazing.

This is so unusual in the industry it's the first time I've come across it in my career. I'm more interested in peoples instincts on it though. The question being, is it fair?

I don’t know anything about how this is usually done but I can see her point of view. A translation of a novel is not simply rendering words and ideas from one language to another. The translator has to be a skilled writer in their own right to produce an enjoyable and readable book. An effective translation could be a work of art in itself.

Surely anyone could argue that you, as author, also “deserve to be properly compensated for [your] work - but only once.” I don’t necessarily believe that, but how are royalties valid for you but not the other people involved in the work?

Your arguments aren't strong. The publisher, distributor etc list is just as true for an author as a translator. You could equally argue the author should be paid a one-off fee for the writing and the publishing house take all profits thereafter because they are the ones who have to market it.
You must know that the quality of a translation makes a huge difference to how well a book does in a foreign country. Of course your initial creativity is what sparked the whole chain of work. But translation is a highly skilled creative process. A translator needs to create a voice in their native tongue just as must as you did. They need to find idioms that fit a given character etc. It's not just a case of literal translation.

This is the indirstry standard. For many design artists they get a commission of their designs are used in merchandise or reprinted. If you think they don’t deserve the commission find someone who won’t take one or learn a language and do it yourself.

I think you are asking a ridiculous question.

I'm not a translator, but if I'm reading a book and thoroughly enjoying it in my native language, that is a joint effort by the author and the translator. A bad translation ruins the content.

Sorry but this seems fair to me a translation to another language is often more like a rewrite if you read the original French Spanish or Latin the translation to English can change it totally

@ellanwood exactly. OP none of your arguments make an ounce of sense.

My instinct is yanbu.

I do wonder what their argument would be though. Would I be convinced? Over not seen anything on pp to convince me.

Absolutely agree with you, OP. My books have sold in other languages and the translator has never had royalties, but has just had a flat fee.

Can't your agent deal with it? They won't be happy with a translator getting royalties.

Are you a member of the Society of Authors? It's worth asking there.

In my experience, no, translators don't get royalties generally, same as the editors don't get royalties for the work they've done, cover designers don't get royalties, etc. I say generally as there are always exceptions (and as an editor, I've had clients trying to pay with me the promise of royalties, but I take the flat fee and just take the risk that they're not going to be the next JK Rowling!) but whenever I've worked on translated projects, the translator has received a flat fee.

Yes, I think it’s fair. A translator can make or break a book. I love Orhan Pamuk’s books, but one of them was so badly translated it was almost unreadable.

I think it is fair. I think you could just as well argue it the other way round (ie. the author should be paid once and the translator should get the royalties - after all it is the translator's work that is actually being sold and read!). I'm just being devil's advocate btw, I think it is fair that both parties get royalties.

Is it the overseas royalties only? Ie the work they actually translated or do they expect it out of the worldwide sales?

Surely anyone could argue that you, as author, also “deserve to be properly compensated for [your] work - but only once.” I don’t necessarily believe that, but how are royalties valid for you but not the other people involved in the work?

This makes no sense at all. The publishers are paid every time the product's sold, too. Everyone gets a cut, but a translator gets a flat fee, just as the copy-editor and the proofreader will get a flat fee.

You will make money off your work that you wouldn’t otherwise have made because of the translator so why are your earnings uncapped but hers aren’t?

Here is what the Society of Authors says:

'Remuneration is a matter for negotiation between the translator and publisher.
In our experience, translators and publishers negotiate fees starting in the region of £95 per thousand words. This fee may be considerably higher, depending on various factors including the translator’s experience, the timescale for the translation, the difficulty of the prose, the amount of research required and the availability of translation funding.
The word count can apply to either the source or target language.
The agreed sum may come as a flat fee, an advance against royalties, or a fee plus royalties from the first copy sold.
For poetry we have observed payment in the region of £1.10 per line with a minimum of £35 per poem.
When negotiating a contract you and the publisher will want to consider a number of factors. How long will it take you to complete the translation? As well as the word count consider your experience, the complexity of the translation and if any additional research is required. Does the publisher need the translation by a very tight deadline? Is there grant funding available to support the costs of your translation? Will you get a royalty on sales?'

how are royalties valid for you but not the other people involved in the work?

They're not. The vast majority of royalties are retained by the publisher. This is the way traditional publishing has always worked.

I think the answer to why an author should be paid royalties is self-evident; it's because they're the original creator of the work. Without that original work there'd be nothing to translate.

Translation is a highly skilled and necessary service, but if every service involved in a translation deserves royalties on each book sold what's to stop the transport companies involved in the distribution making the same claim? In a very real and practical sense, their work is just as important in the distribution of a translation.

It's not like that, @hotaboutanewname.

The foreign publishers buy your book, giving you an advance against royalties. They have to translate it so that their readers in the language can understand it.

Can you really not see the difference between the creator of a piece of work and the translator?

The problem is OP that this is AIBU and will attract people with no knowledge of the publishing industry or how the publishing process works – and how royalties work, who just want to come and get incensed about something they don't really know anything about

I don't think she's BU to ask but you aren't BU to say no.

My instinct is that you should be incentivising the translator to do a good job, because that will have the greatest benefit to your income.

Paying commission seems like a reasonable way to achieve this.

OP, you need to move this out of AIBU. You'll be in the wrong no matter what.