BSD licence

luca (ᴉ) innurindi luca at innurindi.net
Mon Jun 30 11:05:53 BST 2008


danilo at canonical.com (Danilo Šegan) writes:

> Hi Caroline,
>
> Yesterday at 20:32, Caroline Ford wrote:
>
>> I'm now worried that we (upstream) may have to remove the translations
>> we synced from Rosetta. Aren't they currently under the license
>> upstream chooses?
>
> In theory, yes.  However, it was easy to re-use suggestions from other
> projects, so people _have_ reused suggestions with different licenses
> already.  Basically, we can say that we put the responsibility on
> translators to know what they can relicense under project's license,
> and in most cases, they were not really allowed to (i.e. one can't
> relicense else's stuff).
>
> If you are interested in being totally legal, it's a choice between
> you accepting contributions under BSD license, or accepting
> contributions under a bunch of other free software licenses (i.e. GPL,
> LGPL, MPL,...) — because suggestions, which translators have probably
> made use of, came under that bunch of licenses.
>
> I feel the former option is both better and easier for you.

I don't understand, but these strings came from upstream translations?
If yes, the Ubuntu translators mustn't modify them without asking to the
upstream translators.

> Our alternative solution would be not to show suggestions from other
> projects, but that would defeat the purpose of having a large, shared
> translations database.
>
> Also, I wonder how are BSD-licensed translations negatively affecting
> your upstream project?

I think they negatively affect also the Ubuntu translations made in Launchpad, because who
spends some time and energy for providing a quality translation if
someone can later distribute this one in a closed way and
under his own license? The BSD licence can encourage the behaviour of
profiting from the others' work without costs.

So I fear a lack of motivation for contributing to the Ubuntu
translations if we use this license amd my big question is:
What's the rationale for using this license? I ask because I haven't seen till now any
discussion in this ml about this change.  

> (i.e. GNU applications, including those under GPL with strict
> copyright assignment in writing, use completely public domain
> translations)

If they are under GPL, this isn't possible because the translation
makes a derived work. Could you make some examples of this behaviour?

-- 
luca, (ᴉ) innurindi
Luca Padrin
sistemi software
email/jabber: luca at innurindi.net
impronta gpg: 43D7 D917 B86A C6F2 B4B6 3B68 85FE 2372 3F0B B7DB 
fellow della Free Software Foundation Europe

  "I' walking down to emperors bay,
   A signal, a sound, dolphins at play."
          (emperors ballad, 2008-04-29)



More information about the ubuntu-translators mailing list