Re: Licenses of .po files, and translations

On fös, 2008-09-12 at 22:26 +0530, Gora Mohanty wrote:
>   Thus, as I see it, for an application licensed under
> the GPL, the .pot files, and the .po files are also
> GPL-licensed. 
Your argument seems to be that the source of those files 
is the GPL ed source. This only holds for th pot file and 
the untranslated .po file. 
The work of the translators are completely independent of 
the source. 
Also copyright owners may change their minds and change 
license and or terms. Thus translators that were translating 
free software may find that their work is being used in 
non-free software as well. 
Because of this, I would like to explicitly specify GPL as 
the license of the .po files I translate. 
If other translators would like to translate the same software 
under a different license, they are free to do that, because 
the .pot file and the .po files are just a template to be 
filled out with translations of sentences into a 
particular language. Copyright would only hold for the work 
as a whole, and as long as there is a difference in the 
in the translation as a whole, they would have to be considered 
as two separate works, with the similarity beign the template 
dot po file. 

This is my personal view on this. 

Anna Jonna Ármannsdóttir coordinator 
The Icelandic GNOME Localisation team was 11% translated

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]