On Mon, 26 Mar 2012, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
I on the other hand believe that the translator here implicitly put this derived work under GPL, because not doing it would be in violation of the GPL. I believe assuming people follow the law and the license is a better assumtion to make than to assume that they break the law and the license.
If it's GPLV3, GPLV3 has a fair use clause. So the translator is following the law and the license--yet is not putting the translation under GPL, and the translation can't be distributed further (since that would *not* be fair use). GPLV2 has no fair use clause, so with GPLV2 the translator would indeed be violating the license, but he'd be violating the license *legally*--he wouldn't be breaking the law, since fair use is legal. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-legal-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/alpine.lrh.2.00.1203261412250.20...@oxygen.rahul.net
