This site uses cookies.
Some of these cookies are essential to the operation of the site,
while others help to improve your experience by providing insights into how the site is being used.
For more information, please see the ProZ.com privacy policy.
You acknowledge and agree that all content included on this website including but not limited to website design, text, graphics, audio clips, visual clips, logos, button icons and the selection and arrangement thereof shall remain at all times in the website or its content suppliers and is protected by [UK] and international copyright laws. You are permitted to use this material only as expressly authorised by the applicable rights holder. Subject to the foregoing, the page headers, custom graphics and button icons are (unless indicated otherwise) service marks, trademarks, and/or logo’s of [75 Media Ltd].
除非另有指定，页眉、商标和按钮图标等，均视为服务标记、商标及/或[75 Media Ltd]徽标，并适用于以上规定。
-------------------------------------------------- Note added at 1 hr (2014-06-13 16:35:21 GMT) --------------------------------------------------
The forgoing refers to the rules that “all content included on this website including but not limited to website design, text, graphics, audio clips, visual clips, logos, button icons and the selection and arrangement thereof shall remain at all times in the website or its content suppliers and is protected by [UK] and international copyright laws."
-------------------------------------------------- Note added at 2 hrs (2014-06-13 17:13:00 GMT) --------------------------------------------------
Perhaps, "条款“would be better than"规定." （...并适用于上述条款。）
-------------------------------------------------- Note added at 9 hrs (2014-06-14 00:24:29 GMT) --------------------------------------------------
先前的条款("foregoing")已经有界定：所有的websitedesign, text, GRAPHICS...LOGOS, Button ICONS..."is protected by [UK] and international copyright laws." 而这里指出“页眉、商标和按钮图标等”应被视为先前所提到的“GRAPHICS。。。LOGOS， BUTTON ICONS”， 因此，也适用于上述条款：“受UK及国际版权法保护。”
-------------------------------------------------- Note added at 12 hrs (2014-06-14 03:15:58 GMT) --------------------------------------------------
I think the reason why it is there is the fact that there is a different situation involved: "unless indicated otherwise." In other words, those elements can be subject to the copyright protection, or can be otherwise allowed is use under different situations.
Agree to your understanding. (By the way, my humble opinion is that in legal document or any formal document, there is no need to go over the contents involved in the context because the syntactic structure as well as the inter-references within the text is enough to construe it semantically. Any references external to the context may run the risks of creative construing, in which instances the legal consideration may be too wide as to allow equivocal understanding. That's why such transitional phrases as what we see here, such as "subject to the foregoing," "unless otherwise indicated," "in the event of," and so forth function to closely relate ideas together. I don't mean that external references are redundant. They are instrumental to our understanding of the contents, but as far as translation is concerned, sticking to the text sometimes helps because intra-contextual structure and relation may prevail in legal documents. Again, this is just some of my opinions and is open to inprovement and criticism.)
Shirley给的那条链接很好，原来版权和商标不是一回事。首句讲过：网站所有内容都受版权法保护。鉴于版权法所规范的是版权而非商标（这应是由商标法规范），那么是否可以理解为网站至少绝大部分内容都属于相关方的版权？这样一看，末句就不是顺着首句来说的，而是转折，即要澄清：the page headers, custom graphics and button icons视为75 media的商标（而非版权）（但若另有说明，则视为版权或其他类别的intellectual properties）。既然如此，subject to就不是according to/based on/proceeding from的意思，因为无法according to “the foregoing”得出末句的结论。其实，subject to是冲着前面紧挨它的句子(You are permitted to use this material only as expressly authorised by the applicable rights holder)说的，意指：the use of the page headers, custom graphics and button icons is subject to express authorisation by the applicable rights holder (as well)。
另外，我现在觉得unless indicated otherwise是指： unless it is otherwise expressly mentioned that such contents are not the trademarks, service marks or logos of the website operator, 【rather, they are other kinds of intellectual properties (probably copyrights) of the website operator】.
Shirley认为： unless it is otherwise expressly mentioned that such contents are not the trademarks, service marks or logos of the website operator, 【and that such contents are the trademarks, service marks or logos of the content providers or a third party】.
jarv95888认为： unless it is otherwise expressly mentioned that such contents are not the trademarks, service marks or logos of the website operator, 【and that they can be used by others under some particular situations without being authorized】.
The Terms of Use of your cited websites mention that the page headers, custom graphics and button icons are the trademarks, service marks and logos of the website operator ONLY. That is why they use "unless indicated otherwise" to state that such contents are the trademarks, service marks or logos of the website operator, UNLESS it is otherwise expressly mentioned that such contents are NOT the trademarks, service marks or logos of the website operator, and that such contents are the trademarks, service marks or logos of the content providers or a third party. That is the main purpose of using "unless otherwise indicated" here.
The interpretation of the sentence concerning "unless indicated otherwise" by Shirley is either Shirley's mistaken understanding of the phrase or your misunderstanding of Shirley's original meaning. To put it in a simple way, if a sentence says "The book is not to be sold unless it is otherwise indicated," it means it is not to be sold unless someone or something provides alternatives saying that it can be sold in this way or that way in particular. To go back to the original sentence, custom graphics and button icons are considered as service marks, trademarks, and/or logo’s of 75 Media Ltd, unless someone or something says they are not and that they can be used by others under some particular situations without being authorized.
It is usually the case that the rights holder (e.g. the website operator) wants to maximize their rights and interests by including all the items (copyrights, trademarks, service marks, logos, etc.) in the Terms of Use. Therefore, both "copyrights" and "trademarks, service marks and/or logos" are mentioned separately in different locations of the Terms of Use.
Although intellectual property rights laws differ among different countries, "copyrights" and "trademarks" are two different concepts in intellectual property rights and moreover, their scope also differs. See: http://www.uspto.gov/trademarks/basics/definitions.jsp
It is usually the case that the rights holder (e.g. the website operator) wants to maximize their rights and interests.
You may also have recognized that all the contents of this website is deemed the copyrights of the website operator or the content providers, while ONLY the page headers, custom graphics and button icons are deemed the trademarks, service marks and/or logos of the website operator or the content providers.
Shirley觉得unless indicated otherwise是指UNLESS it is otherwise expressly mentioned that 【such contents are the trademarks, service marks or logos of the content providers concerned】。能否告诉我你觉得unless indicated otherwise究竟是otherwise indicate what?
Therefore, the last sentence of the first passage can be rewritten as follows:
The page headers, custom graphics and button icons, the use of which is subject to express authorisation by the applicable rights holder, are (unless indicated otherwise) service marks, trademarks, and/or logo’s of 75 Media Ltd.
Also, in the section “Copyright” where the first passage is taken, I find the second passage are very suggestive and I quote it here “All software used on this website is the property of 75 Media Ltd and is protected by UK and international copyright laws ALL RIGHTS ARE RESERVED. Permission is granted to electronically copy and to print in hard copy portions of this website for the purposes of placing an order with SCFCOS and using this website as a shopping resource only. Any other use of materials on this website including but not limited to reproduction for purposes other than those noted above, modification, distribution, transmission, broadcasting, republication, downloading or uploading without the prior written permission of 75 Media Ltd is strictly prohibited.”
According to the context, it can inferred that 75 Media Ltd is applicable rights holder mentioned in the first passage of this section. The page headers, custom graphics and button icons are an integral part of the abovementioned all contents included on this website.
As Shirley pointed out earlier, 75 Media Ltd. is the operator of this website but may not necessarily be the content supplier concerned. In the section “Ownership and Operation” on this website, instead of “the Stockport County Football Club Online Shop is owned and operated by 75 Media Ltd.”, there is “the Stockport County Football Club Online Shop is operated by 75 Media Ltd.” In addition, there is no concrete evidence to further prove the relationship between the Stockport County Football Club Online Shop and 75 Media Ltd. So it seems hardly possible to reach the conclusion that all contents included on this website shall belong to 75 Media or its content suppliers.
前半十分明顯在宣示版权，末句是在細部強调page header! custom graphic! and button icon 等同于商标，並受版杈保護(subject to the same protection)。這使我想到一个例子：BMW本来有个裝飾用的三条斜紋彩帶，但現已蔚然成為除了原有的圓形藍白标志以外的另一个logo。因此末句是在宣称這些page header, custom graphic, and button icon均視同註册商标、服務商标或是其logo。因此也同樣subject to the same protection. (I think this also serves as an answer to Eureka's message,)
By saying "BOTH the website operator and the content providers", I only mean to say that both the website operator and the content providers will be mentioned in the Terms of Use but it does not necessarily mean that BOTH of them will be the owners of the trademarks, service marks and/or logos. The word "OR" is used here.
By saying "BOTH the website operator and the content providers", I only mean to say that both the website operator and the content providers will be mentioned in the Terms of Use but it does not necessarily mean that BOTH of them will be the owners of the trademarks, service marks and/or logos. The word "OR
All logos, splash screens, page headers, custom graphics, and button icons displayed on this Site are service marks, trademarks, and/or trade dress (collectively, "Marks") of Bargaaba Dot Com or its third-party licensors. See: http://www.bargaaba.com/terms.php
In general, the page headers, custom graphics and button icons as used in most Terms of Use may be expressly deemed the trademarks, service marks and logos of BOTH the website operator and the content providers.
However, the Terms of Use of your cited websites have been drafted "too aggressively" to include the page headers, custom graphics and button icons as the trademarks, service marks and logos of the website operator ONLY. That is why they use "unless indicated otherwise" to state that such contents are the trademarks, service marks or logos of the website operator, UNLESS it is otherwise expressly mentioned that such contents are the trademarks, service marks or logos of the content providers concerned. That is the main purpose of using "unless otherwise indicated" here.
All logos, splash screens, page headers, custom graphics, and button icons displayed on this Site are service marks, trademarks, and/or trade dress (collectively, "Marks") of Bargaaba Dot Com or its third-party licensors. See: http://www.bargaaba.com/terms.php
In general, the page headers, custom graphics and button icons as used in most Terms of Use will expressly mention that BOTH the website operator and the content providers may be deemed the owners of the trademarks, service marks and logos of such contents.
However, the Terms of Use of your cited websites have been drafted "too aggressively" to include the page headers, custom graphics and button icons as the trademarks, service marks and logos of the website operator. That is why they use "unless indicated otherwise" to state that such contents are the trademarks, service marks or logos of the website operator, UNLESS it is otherwise expressly mentioned that such contents are the trademarks, service marks or logos of the content providers. That is the main purpose of using "unless otherwise indicated" here.
You acknowledge and agree that all content included on this website including but not limited to website design, text, graphics, audio clips, visual clips, logos, button icons and the selection and arrangement thereof shall remain at all times vested in [XYZ Company] or its content suppliers and is protected by [some country’s] and international copyright laws. You are permitted to use this material only as expressly authorised by the applicable rights holder. Subject to the foregoing, the page headers, custom graphics and button icons are (unless indicated otherwise) service marks, trademarks, and/or [trade dress] of [XYZ Company].
我据此判断原问题中“shall remain at all times in the website or its content suppliers”应是“shall remain at all times vested in 75 Media Ltd or its content suppliers”。如果是这样，subject to the foregoing似乎就不能理解为“因此”，因为你怎么肯定the page headers, custom graphics and button icons就一定是75 Media Ltd这家公司的service marks, trademarks, and/or logo？就没有可能是its content suppliers的吗？
express the ideas in the target language in an accurate and CLEAR way. When a term, literally converted, will lead to difficulty in understanding, you have to play around it with other choice of words in the target language, which carries the same meaning as the source. 你认为可将subject to the foregoing译为“适用于上述条款”或者“受上述条款规限”，但“正因为如此”不是一样的意思，而且更简洁吗？ Your use of "above clause/article" is not very clear, because "foregoing" and "above" are not exactly the same. The above clause can mean the paragraph before the sentence that is numbered. So your version is ambiguous.
Shang提供的例子十分具有参考价值。尤其是“受前述条款规范”更具专业语气。 另一例子的“Subject to the foregoing provision, where the assured has over-insured by double insurance, a proportionate part of the several premiums is returnable.” 用法跟这里提问的用法并不相同，它更适用于Ivan 和Shirley所建议的"根据 … 规定"。不过，例子里的中译似乎与原文有很大的出路。
All the content under this website is copyrighted and proprietary (i.e. owned by the respective content supplier). According to the aforementioned, the page headers, custom graphics and button icons shall be deemed the service marks, trademarks, and/or logo(s) of 75 Media Ltd. (which is the operator of this website but may not necessarily be the content supplier concerned), unless otherwise stated.
Explanation: 2 dependent or conditional upon: the proposed merger is subject to the approval of the shareholders.
以 什么什么 为条件
Example sentence(s):
subject to the foregoing 以上述为前提条件
Daniel Newham Local time: 13:19 Native speaker of: English
Notes to answerer
Asker: Hi. If a page header is vested in XYZ company, then it is. That doesn't require any "precondition", does it? I don't think it can be translated to "以...为前提条件" in this case, though I know many translators translate this phrase invariably in that way.
tanglsus United States Local time: 01:19 Works in field Native speaker of: Chinese PRO pts in category: 2
Notes to answerer
Asker: Hi. If a page header is vested in XYZ company, then it is. That doesn't require any "precondition", does it? I don't think it can be translated to "以...为前提条件" in this case, though I know many translators translate this phrase invariably in that way.
除非另有指定，页眉、商标和按钮图标等，均视为服务标记、商标及/或[75 Media Ltd]徽标，并适用于以上规定。
-------------------------------------------------- Note added at 1 hr (2014-06-13 16:35:21 GMT) --------------------------------------------------
The forgoing refers to the rules that “all content included on this website including but not limited to website design, text, graphics, audio clips, visual clips, logos, button icons and the selection and arrangement thereof shall remain at all times in the website or its content suppliers and is protected by [UK] and international copyright laws."
-------------------------------------------------- Note added at 2 hrs (2014-06-13 17:13:00 GMT) --------------------------------------------------
Perhaps, "条款“would be better than"规定." （...并适用于上述条款。）
-------------------------------------------------- Note added at 9 hrs (2014-06-14 00:24:29 GMT) --------------------------------------------------
先前的条款("foregoing")已经有界定：所有的websitedesign, text, GRAPHICS...LOGOS, Button ICONS..."is protected by [UK] and international copyright laws." 而这里指出“页眉、商标和按钮图标等”应被视为先前所提到的“GRAPHICS。。。LOGOS， BUTTON ICONS”， 因此，也适用于上述条款：“受UK及国际版权法保护。”
-------------------------------------------------- Note added at 12 hrs (2014-06-14 03:15:58 GMT) --------------------------------------------------
I think the reason why it is there is the fact that there is a different situation involved: "unless indicated otherwise." In other words, those elements can be subject to the copyright protection, or can be otherwise allowed is use under different situations.
jarv95888 Local time: 01:19 Works in field Native speaker of: Chinese, English PRO pts in category: 8
Asker: 我的意思就是，为什么要加上subject to the foregoing？如果原句中没有这个成分，对原本要表达的意思有什么影响？因为我看不出“the page headers, custom graphics and button icons are (unless indicated otherwise) service marks, trademarks, and/or logo’s of [75 Media Ltd]”和“all content included on this website including but not limited to website design, text, graphics, audio clips, visual clips, logos, button icons and the selection and arrangement thereof shall remain at all times in the website or its content suppliers and is protected by [UK] and international copyright laws”有什么逻辑关系。如果一个商标属于这家公司的版权，那就是属于，就算要附带条件（或条款或规定），也得是相关的吧，但我看不出前文（所谓的the foregoing）和末句有什么相关。具体到你说的，“适用于上述条款”，又怎么个适用法呢？就像我说：“江苏某块地归甲公司所有。这块地仅可由甲公司用来办公，并适用于以上规定。”这个“适用于以上规定”插在这里干嘛的呢？删掉它对原文意思丝毫没影响。
Asker: 我想说明下，原问题中例句remain at all times in the website or its content suppliers应该是那个网站搞错了，我认为应该是remain at all times vested in 75 Media Ltd or its content suppliers。我看了好几个网站，都是remain at all times vested in [XYZ company] or its content suppliers这种格式。比如这里：http://www.tcmsports.com.au/terms-and-conditions
Asker: 看了你的解释，我明白些了。不过，我始终觉得subject to the foregoing在这里是多此一举。首句已经说明：网站所有内容都属于75 Media Ltd或其内容提供商所有，受英国及国际版权法保护。既然这样，网站上属于75 Media Ltd 服务标记、商标及/或徽标的那些page header、custom graphic 和 button icon 自然也受英国及国际版权法保护，这是不言而喻的。我猜后面之所以要交代the page headers, custom graphics and button icons are (unless indicated otherwise) service marks, trademarks, and/or logo’s of 75 Media Ltd 这部分，可能是要说明：这类内容是75 Media Ltd这家公司所有，而非前文提到的its its content suppliers 所有。这样一看，把“Subject to the foregoing”替换为“In particular”似乎更有逻辑，不会让人丈二和尚摸不着头脑。
Asker: 不要误会哈，我一直相信这里subject to不可能是因果关系。只不过是不是平行关系，我不肯定。我是不太认可原文作者的写法的，因为后面交代的东西受不受版权法保护显而易见。我倾向认为末句（不包含subject to the foregoing这部分）是在首句基础上作进一步说明，有那么点递进关系。:)
Asker: 我认为我的问题中将subject to the foregoing译为“适用于上述条款”或者“受上述条款规限”可以。只不过经你一解释，我觉得subject to the foregoing在这里实在多余。
Login or register (free and only takes a few minutes) to participate in this question.
You will also have access to many other tools and opportunities designed for those who have language-related jobs
(or are passionate about them). Participation is free and the site has a strict confidentiality policy.
