Copyright for translations and templates
[please Cc me on answers, I am not subscribed to debian-i18n]
Hi,
licensing of translations and templates are a pet peeve of mine. I think
we often do not pay enough attention on this topic and I usually try to
do better in this regard. When a translator submits a translation for
one of my packages, I pay attention on a proper copyright notice in the
translation that I can refer to in debian/copyright without blushing in
shame.
I must however admit, that my preparatory work is often not as good as I
would like it to be. For example, some of adduser's manual page
translations have grown a copyright statement that assigns copyright to
the FSF without stating which license is to be applied. This cannot be
correct, and strictly speaking those translations need to be thrown out
and started over again with a proper license by a known translator.
In the past I was able to ignore this, but in the days of DEP-5 forced
attention to copyright and licenses I cannot overlook that any more.
What is the recommended way to handle this?
- throw all improperly licensed translations out and start over?
- ask a translator who submits a new translation to fix the copyright
statemennt, moving the burden of work from the package maintainer to
the translator? I have already had translators saying like "no, that's
not my job" to that request
- continue ignoring the subject?
And if that's not interesting enough, we strictly have two copyrights
applying to translation files: Once the author of the code/document
being translated, as the English version of the text is also in the po
file, and second the translator who has clearly authored the
translation.
Is it clearly documented how to handle this?
Greetings
Marc
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Marc Haber | "I don't trust Computers. They | Mailadresse im Header
Leimen, Germany | lose things." Winona Ryder | Fon: *49 6224 1600402
Nordisch by Nature | How to make an American Quilt | Fax: *49 6224 1600421
Reply to: