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

[Chad Perrin]

On Tue, Apr 03, 2012 at 03:09:58PM -0500, Karl Fogel wrote:
> 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.

To the extent that terms in another language could override terms in the
language you're evaluating, though, they're equally important -- and vice
versa, and so on.

. . . but yeah, I guess the smart way to handle it is to nail down the
terms in one language first, then those in the other later, and see about
integration issues after that.

-- 
Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ]