Chinese and English archive texts include AI-assisted translations, not independently human-reviewed. Consult the original-language sources alongside them.
Three organisations recommend crediting post-editing as editorial work, distinguishing it from literary translation in connection with library remuneration.
What changed
Three organisations recommend crediting post-editing as editorial work, distinguishing it from literary translation in connection with library remuneration.
Joint recommendations, not new law. The authority's original text and actual adoption were not checked; PDF date has month precision only.
Editorial research question
Editorial interpretation: connects credit, bibliographic metadata and cultural remuneration to protect literary translation's professional identity, without denying that post-editing involves labour.
This is an editorial interpretation or question, separate from factual statements.
Evidence & sources
Three organisations recommend crediting post-editing as editorial work, distinguishing it from literary translation in connection with library remuneration.
SRC-0358Full announcement, lines 110–121.
Material relevant to this case; see the locator for the precise scope read.
SRC-0359Full one-page text, lines 0–28, dated April 2025.
Dansk Oversætterforbund · DA · 2025-04-02
Danske Forlag / Dansk Oversætterforbund / Dansk Forfatterforening · DA · Date unknown
Case
Related documents
DOC-0346DOF reaches an agreement with Danish Publishers on crediting machine translationDOC-0347Entitlement to public lending remuneration when AI is used in translationCite this record
ANTI-AI ARCHIVE. “Three Danish organisations announce joint recommendations on crediting machine-translation post-editing.” evt-0308. Include this page’s URL and your access date when citing.