[License-discuss] Newbie post: Localisable open source software license
forums at david-woolley.me.uk
Mon Oct 21 13:29:59 UTC 2013
On 21/10/13 07:39, Maxthon Chan wrote:
> There is a project, Creative Commons, that focuses on providing free
> license for art, music and works alike. They tackled the localisation
> issue well, by providing localised licenses that is interchangeable with
No they don't. All the licences seem to be in English. What is
localised is the lay person's summary of the licence. E.g., the Chinese
summary of CC-BY-SA, is
<http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/deed.zh>, but the first
link on that page (法律文本（许可协议全文）),
<http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/legalcode>, points to the
English language text of the actual licence.
> each other, even in the copyleft variants.However Creative Commons does
> not work well with software. I can CC license my documentations but not
> the software itself.
> I would like to know your opinions on a localisable open source license.
In general, a translation of a licence is a different licence, because
one cannot exactly translate from one language to another. In fact, one
could probably argue that choice of law needs to be specified, as well.
Although Creative Commons have chosen to create the lay versions of the
licence, I suspect many open source drafters would not want to do so,
because users might believe that the summary is the licence.
More information about the License-discuss