Can translators(Google Translate, Deepl etc.) own the translation of just one word?

Question

I have a list of just words in English language. Can I use translations of these words to other languages in commercial? For example Google Translate Terms of Service says that I can use their translations only for personal use. Important notice: I'm not planning to use these services each time I want to get a translation. I'm planning to use PREtranslated words list. Thanks in advance.

Answer 1

Single-Word translations are facts or uncreative

Facts are not copyrightable - See Feist v Rural. As such, 1:1 combinations might be considered facts and uncopyrightable. Further, there is no creativity in any individual word and the established one or more possible translations. Creativity only starts when the translation contains full sentences and actual expressions.

At best, the whole dictionary gets database copyright protection where it exists.

Answer 2

A creative work is only protected in the case of a person creating that work. The individual (conventional) words of a language are not created by the author, they have existed for a very long time. The relation between words in two languages may or may not be created (recognized) by an individual – the English and French words "egg", "oeuf" refer to the same thing and that equivalence has been known for a millenium (was not created by Google). Google's method relies on massive copyright infringement without any creativity (it is the automatic product of a computer program, possibly excused under fair use), and automatic computer program outputs are not protected by law.

This is not the forum for discussing how human translations work and why they can be creative (even when selecting an appropriate translation for a single word), it is sufficient to say that when a computer program emulates the human creative process (for instance in translating the word kutaangalaala in an obscure language, which I would translate as "to be paralyzed in not knowing know what to do in a situation"), that relation is not "a fact" and it is creative, but it is a relationship and not an expression. Method patents (not copyright) protect certain kinds of "relations". I probably cannot gain copyright over the short English phrase "to be paralyzed in not knowing know what to do in a situation" (the quantum of creativity required for protection is judged on a case by case basis).

In short, translations of words and phrases are not your property because you did not create those words, they already existed, and the specific arrangements that constitute a translation (into English, for instance) of one word in a language were also not created by you, they were created by someone else. There is a tiny chance that a translation of one word could be protected when the translation is a word-sequence with null prior attestation, but not a 1-to-1 translation "egg" ←→ "oeuf".

Google's prohibition is about something else: you can only use their software non-commercially, but you would not be e.g. embedding Translate into a commercial web page.