[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Apple's APSL 2.0 " Debian Free Software Guidelines"-compliant?

On Sat, 2004-06-26 at 17:23, Andrew Suffield wrote:

> > > Where You are located in the province of Quebec, Canada, the following
> > > clause applies: The parties hereby confirm that they have requested
> > > that this License and all related documents be drafted in English. Les
> > > parties ont exige que le present contrat et tous les documents
> > > connexes soient rediges en anglais.
> > 
> > This seems a discrimination betwwen people and thus to violate DFSG#5
> > (No Discrimination Against Persons or Groups).
> Nah, this is just a reference to a particularly stupid tenet of their law.

It's not "particularly stupid" to expect that, if you sign a contract,
it should be in a language you understand. Being an anglophone in
Quebec, I've been happy for this provision many times. My French is OK,
but I feel a lot more comfortable reading legalese in English.

Whether a software license requires the same level of _contractual_
understanding is an open question, though. And it makes my preferences
and desires part of the license. I never requested an English version
from Apple; does that invalidate my license? If I were to ask Apple for
a French or Mikmak or Cree version instead, would _that_ invalidate my

> I once saw some film or other that satirised it rather well:

That's unrelated, except for the fact that it has to do with French.
There's no requirement that contracts have to be bilingual nor in the
dominant language; just that both parties understand the language of the


Evan Prodromou <evan@debian.org>

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Reply to: