A dishonest person will lie about endorsement, so I don't see that as adequate protection against misrepresentation. Do you have a way to solve that problem?
Is anyone outside of a big publisher really advocating, "the bludgeon of completely blocking anything that lacks permission."? On Sunday 26 April 2015, Aaron Wolf wrote: > It's reasonable enough to require > that the translation be indicated as not an officially accepted > translation versus requiring actual permission to publish any translation. > ... > Ideas are hampered and progress is limited when we fail to respect > cultural freedom, and there are ways to address the other concerns about > mis-translation than simply the bludgeon of completely blocking anything > that lacks explicit permission.
