On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 2:01 PM, Gervase Markham <[email protected]> wrote: > However, you would have to consider the possibility that your glossary could > only be _used_ by GPLed projects in the case, because use of it might make > the target translation a derivative work of the glossary.
I'd like to highlight this bit. Depending on your goal, and assuming that Gerv's conclusion (and neither he nor I are lawyers) is correct, you might be creating something which is less than useful for a large portion of the population. Hypothetically you could be creating a glossary that couldn't be used by Mozilla contributors to improve Mozilla. This part hinges on 'Derived work'. You definitely should contact a lawyer. My personal view on l10n is actually quite different, but I haven't spent the necessary money to collect support for it, so I will not share it here. I do work on a translation and I'd probably choose to actively ignore any project with a glossary under a license that isn't commercial, BSD or PD (especially anything with a viral license). Note that 'commercial' tends to be "you've paid for the right to use this, so as long as you don't sell your own copies of it, you're free to use it" (e.g. when you buy a classic dead tree book), if the commercial license is more restrictive than that, i probably wouldn't buy or us it either. _______________________________________________ legal mailing list [email protected] https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/legal
