Hi all, I searched the archives of -legal for anything similar to this, but could not find anything. Excuse me if this has already been discussed, I would then be grateful for a pointer. Also, please keep me CC'ed, as I'm not subscribed to -legal. While translating a pot file into German, I found that the program prints its license terms via gettext. Therefore, the license itself appears in the list of translatable messages. Specifically, it uses the GPL with the following paragraphs: "This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify\n" "it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by\n" "the Free Software Foundation; either version 2 of the License, or (at\n" "your option) any later version.\n" "\n" "This program is distributed in the hope that it will be useful, but\n" "WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of\n" "MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. See the GNU\n" "General Public License, /usr/share/common-licenses/GPL, for more details\n" My first thought was to look up the translation on www.gnu.org, and they offer an unofficial translation of the GPL into German. I included the corresponding two paragraphs and sent the file for reviewing to our German translation coordination list. However, we could not decide whether translating a license is ok or not. We tend to think that we should better *not* translate the paragraphs. Please note that there's still a pointer to the original license (/usr/share/common-licenses/GPL) which is in English. The translation would only apply to the informational text above, leaving the full license intact. Would this already qualify as "re-licensing", which we obviously cannot do? Or merely a help to better understand the terms and conditions? Cheers, -- Tobias Warning: Trespassers will be shot. Survivors will be shot again.
Description: PGP signature