unknown
1970-01-01 00:00:00 UTC
--
Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
------FKRAEPTPWEIAVMWJ7MH9LNYZ4VEDN9
Content-Type: text/html;
charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<html><head></head><body>Internationalization files are derivative works if they internationalize strings that were created by someone else. And if those strings were part of an original GPL work there is potentially a license violation. But if they were created by the same author as the GPL program they are not derivative of anything. It's also going to be difficult to argue convincingly to a court that they must be under a license that is compatible with the rest of the program, they are arguably input to the program.<br>
<br>
So the real question here is whether Siylvestre's original text strings are translated in files under different licenses than his original versions.<br>
<br>
We'd like the GPL to stick to any works that are combined with the program in any way. Unfortunately case law from CAI v. Altai to Oracle v. Google has shot down that theory. This is ultimately good for Free Software in that we can do things like clone APIs, proprietary computer languages, and the overall functionality of programs only because licenses are not as effective as the software author would like them to be.<br>
<br>
Thanks<br>
<br>
Bruce<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On January 28, 2014 11:28:40 AM PST, Hendrik Weimer <***@enyo.de> wrote:<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;"> <pre class="k9mail">Sylvestre Ledru <***@debian.org> writes:<br /><br /><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #729fcf; padding-left: 1ex;">
Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
------FKRAEPTPWEIAVMWJ7MH9LNYZ4VEDN9
Content-Type: text/html;
charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<html><head></head><body>Internationalization files are derivative works if they internationalize strings that were created by someone else. And if those strings were part of an original GPL work there is potentially a license violation. But if they were created by the same author as the GPL program they are not derivative of anything. It's also going to be difficult to argue convincingly to a court that they must be under a license that is compatible with the rest of the program, they are arguably input to the program.<br>
<br>
So the real question here is whether Siylvestre's original text strings are translated in files under different licenses than his original versions.<br>
<br>
We'd like the GPL to stick to any works that are combined with the program in any way. Unfortunately case law from CAI v. Altai to Oracle v. Google has shot down that theory. This is ultimately good for Free Software in that we can do things like clone APIs, proprietary computer languages, and the overall functionality of programs only because licenses are not as effective as the software author would like them to be.<br>
<br>
Thanks<br>
<br>
Bruce<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On January 28, 2014 11:28:40 AM PST, Hendrik Weimer <***@enyo.de> wrote:<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;"> <pre class="k9mail">Sylvestre Ledru <***@debian.org> writes:<br /><br /><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #729fcf; padding-left: 1ex;">