[License-review] CeCILL license V2.1 for Approval

[Karl Fogel]

Chad Perrin <perrin at apotheon.com> writes:
>> This sort of thing goes on all the time in bilingual countries such as
>> Canada, and in all national courts that have to interpret treaties
>> and U.N. conventions.
>
>It seems, then, that to qualify as an open source license it would need
>to do so not only in both languages but in any mix of conditions where
>the two disagree, to account for possible interpretations in court.  That
>sounds like a mess to try to untangle.

Well, in theory.  But in practice, the language question is actually the
least of my worries -- the other questions (about 6.4, 6.2, 7, and 11.1)
are probably more important for our purposes here anyway.