Uniform terminology (Re: UnitedLinux and "open source")

[I.R.Maturana]

[Mahesh T Pai]
Would not the problem solved if the comunity arrives at a consensus on
terminilogy, and merely translate this consensus?  Would not these
translations based on consensus obviate the need for using different
language/terminilogy for different legal systems?

Yes, i think so :-D)
Ideally, you define a 'translatable' model, with clear principles
and clear exposition. Then you publish 'translated' versions.
I say 'Ideally', because the real practice does not follow this ideal
2-step procedure: it is rather a negociation between parties who
recognize themselves as equal in rights (if you like, you can consider
that these rights are potential, until the contract becomes actual).

Practically, what you get is a growing set of translated licenses,
which all match together, by reciprocal re-translation.
The "ideal model" (the draft), quickly dilutes itself as a version
from others translations. For example, because you will find different
wording in another language you can read, and this will help you to
introduce some clarifications in your own version.

Note that Fuzzy Logic Computers works this way, so we can consider
this methodology quite appropiate to Advanced Software Licences :-)

Finally, this is a continuous process, and you know that you are doing
the things well when people forget that the actual license has ever
had a model, or consider the version in their own language as the
original, and wonder why, for example, Laws never had an author,
but only mentors.(*)

This way, you develop a real, public Law, shared under all languages.
This law will have the same properties under any language and will be
enforceable in any country. Simply because it has been writen down by
citizen who, while speaking their own language, therefore exercise
their own citizen rights under the Laws of their respectives countries.
Simply say: human rights.

Kind regards.

[I.R.Maturana -- Trad En>[ES<>FR] - http://www.in3activa.net ]
PLT/LPT License(**): http://www.in3activa.org/doc/en/LPT-EN.html


(*) To be strict, Laws can have translators (sometimes called lawyers :-))
But usually, when you find that a Law is copyrighted by somebody, there
is a true chance to discover that there is something wrong in the rationale.
(**) Public Licence of Translation (presently under indeterminate
submission state to OSI group :-))




--
license-discuss archive is at http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3