On 03/08/14 15:01, Jonathan Paugh wrote: > > On 03/08/2014 09:48 PM, Georg Pfeiffer wrote: >> Dear Sirs, >> >> the german trennmuster project [1] provides a LaTeX package >> de-hyph-exptl wich is part of the debian texlive-lang-german >> package. The core component is a long list of german words as source for >> the generation of hyphenation patterns wich is actually not a part of >> debian. >> >> We intend to give the whole project a default license wich is a german >> translation of the MIT license [2]. The english text is included. Our >> intention is, that the german text shall be more clear and more >> convenient to german project members (authors) as well as for german >> customers wich we estimate to be the majority as well on the author as >> on the customer side. >> >> Are there any concerns about the assignment of a german language license >> to an almost german project? The sub parts of our project integrated >> into debian packages will stay further under the common english licenses >> of course. > The only problem I see is, which license takes legal force? Will the > project be licensed under the MIT (English) License, with the German > version provided merely for convenience, or vice versa; or even dual > licensed under both. Consider: what if there is a mistranslation, or > other error in only one version of the license. Which would take > precedence? > > I suggest licensing under the MIT license, as is (in English), and > specifying (either in German or English (or both?)) that the German > translation is merely for reference/convenience sake. I suggest using > the English version as the "official" version not to discriminate > against German users, but to avoid license proliferation, and to expose > any potential legal issues in the license to a wider audience. (And, of > course, the community has already established that there are no problems > with MIT as is.) > > All that said, IANAL, and I do not represent the position of Debian or > anyone else.
If I remember, a license can still be DFSG-free even if it isn't in English, but as has been said above, an English license is preferable. You could always dual license; even if the German translation later turns out to be non-free for some technical reason, you can still keep the package in main because of the MIT license. Also, for German-speaking contributors, they will be releasing their contributions under a license that they understand. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-legal-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/53ddc45b.7030...@bitmessage.ch