Is an English license mandatory in Debian? (was: Please advise regarding DFSG compliance of WPL-2)
I note you still don't answer my question.
Let me restate this: is an English license mandatory in Debian?
If so, shouldn't it be noted somewhere? E.g. in the DFSG?
On Tue, 19 Feb 2019 at 16:06, Christian Kastner <ckk@kvr.at> wrote:
>
> Licensee being fooled by the translation implies that they assigned (at
> least some) value to the translation, which is something that the text
> expressly tells them not to do.
>
> Licensee ignored Licensor's disclaimer, and it's all but impossible to
> see a judge fault the Licensor for the Licensee's notable ignorance.
This is starting to be a bit theoretical, but nevertheless interesting.
Imagine if you were right and a Chinese or Arabic web service
porposedly did a translation error in the _non-authoritative_ English
translation of their Term of Services.
A simple negation got accidentally inserted midtext.
The English text states "By using the Service, the User will NOT
assign a non-exclusive, worldwide, transderable copyright to the
Service Provider on any contents created by the User".
Do you really think that a Judge would recognise the copyright
assignment to the Service Provider just because the ToS states,
clearly and bluntly, that the English text is not autoritative?
Judges do errors, but they are not dumb computers.
Giacomo
Reply to: