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 license? > 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 contract. ~ESP -- Evan Prodromou <evan@debian.org>
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part