Re: copyright files in other languages
Milan Zamazal writes:
> No, requiring knowing dozens of languages would be *real* discrimination.
Indeed, also. But carefully *not* requiring anything is much better since
it puts the responsibility where it belongs: with the developer who
uploaded the package (to main). We do *not* want debian as such to have
any responsibility (unless debian-qa is *really* looking for new tasks :)
> Eh? Sorry, I don't want. If I made an interesting program with a
> license in Czech, would you learn Czech to know usage and copying
> conditions?
I'll hope that some some kind debian developer who knows Czech will upload
it for me and since I trust debian I'll happily use it...
If a true need for an English version of the Copyright arises then the only
legally viable solution is if the upstream author herself (maybe with help)
translates the license. That way everybody is happy and we don't have to
mention any particular languages in the policy.
> I don't want to use any program with no license I can read. So I'm
> against inclusion of programs without license or its translation in
> English.
>
> I think requiring inclusion of (at least) unofficial English translation
> of non-English license in the package in main is appropriate. I also
> think the original license should be always included in the package of
> course.
I disagree: the responsibility is clearly placed (see above) thus there is
no problem. If you don't trust debian then do not download the packages
where you cannot verify it yourself (or put pressure on the upstream
maintainer).
- o -
Manoj Srivastava writes:
>Guy Maor wrote:
>>> Should an English translation be required? Currently a user need only
>>> speak English to decide if a package is free enough for him.
>
>Javier> I think it should be.
>
> Umm, I am not sure I agere. So far, we have not discriminated
> on the basis od language, and I suggest we do not start now. If the
> Debian developer has vetted the package, and determined where it goes
> in the scheme of things, most of us are happy to trust that.
I agree strongly. In fact we do not want the debian organization to have
*any* responsibility because that makes debian legally vulnerable for
indivividuals actions...
> Even were the copyright in English, I am sure I can come up
> with something that would or would not meet the DFSG, but would need
> someone trained in law to so determine. Should we start throwing
> those packages out since they would require legal training for the
> user to determine of they were free enough?
We already do this: if no debian developer can take the ultimate
responsibility then often the package is dropped (from main) even when it
is not strictly necessary (for example when it is known that noone will
ever *exercise* the copyright which for others is sufficient reason to just
include stuff)...
Cheers,
Kristoffer
--
Kristoffer Høgsbro Rose, phd, prof.associé <http://www.ens-lyon.fr/~krisrose>
addr: LIP, Ecole Normale Supérieure de Lyon, 46 Allée d'Italie, F-69364 Lyon 7
phone: +33(0)4 7272 8642, fax +33(0)4 7272 8080 <Kristoffer.Rose@ENS-Lyon.FR>
pgp f-p: A4D3 5BD7 3EC5 7CA2 924E D21D 126B B8E0 <krisrose@{debian,tug}.org>
Reply to: