• License and Copyright info for debconf translation of aide package

    From Marc Haber@21:1/5 to All on Wed Jan 20 10:20:02 2021
    Hi,

    while reviewing the aide package for writing a machine-readable debian/copyright file, I have stumbled up on the translations.

    https://salsa.debian.org/debian/aide/-/tree/master/debian/po

    Oh, what a mess.

    Most of the translatiosn don't have a license statement at all, some
    have correctly stated that the same license as for the aide package
    applies, and one translator has made an obvious cut&paste error, putting
    the aide translation under the same license as the postfix package.
    Since the postfix package uses a rather exotic dual-license scheme that
    doesn't include a GPL variant, this is rather bad for an otherweise
    GPLled package.

    Most of the files have not been touched for a decade, and I doubt that
    the original translators are still around.

    Can I safely assume that a translation without an explicit license was
    meant to be licensed with the package, which would be GPL-2+ in this
    case? Or is this unlicensed work and need to be relicensed, and in the
    case the original translator is no longer available, must be removed?

    Greetings
    Marc

    -- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Marc Haber | "I don't trust Computers. They | Mailadresse im Header Leimen, Germany | lose things." Winona Ryder | Fon: *49 6224 1600402 Nordisch by Nature | How to make an American Quilt | Fax: *49 6224 1600421

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Francesco Poli@21:1/5 to All on Thu Jan 21 00:00:01 2021
    On Wed, 20 Jan 2021 10:16:19 +0100 Marc Haber wrote:

    Hi,

    Hello!


    while reviewing the aide package for writing a machine-readable debian/copyright file, I have stumbled up on the translations.

    I think that paying attention to translation licenses is a good thing
    to do.
    Thanks for caring about it!


    https://salsa.debian.org/debian/aide/-/tree/master/debian/po

    Oh, what a mess.

    Most of the translatiosn don't have a license statement at all, some
    have correctly stated that the same license as for the aide package
    applies, and one translator has made an obvious cut&paste error, putting
    the aide translation under the same license as the postfix package.

    Ouch! :-(

    Since the postfix package uses a rather exotic dual-license scheme that doesn't include a GPL variant, this is rather bad for an otherweise
    GPLled package.

    Indeed, postfix is dual-licensed under the EPL v2.0 and the IBM CPL v1.0
    (I am [not even convinced] that this license meets the DFSG).

    Definitely GPL-incompatible, anyway.
    I personally think that this translation should be re-licensed by the translators or removed.

    [not even convinced]: <https://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2006/06/msg00234.html>


    Most of the files have not been touched for a decade, and I doubt that
    the original translators are still around.

    Can I safely assume that a translation without an explicit license was
    meant to be licensed with the package, which would be GPL-2+ in this
    case?

    Well, a translation (.po file) is a derivative work of the original
    message collection (.pot file), which is extracted from the original
    program.
    If the original program is under the GNU GPL v2 license or later, one
    can argue that the translation is only distributable under the same
    licensing scheme (or later), and hence implicitly under the GPL.

    However, my personal opinion is that it would be much much better, if
    the licensing status of the translation file were explicitly stated.
    Hence, I would suggest you to seek clarification from translators,
    whenever possible.

    Or is this unlicensed work and need to be relicensed, and in the
    case the original translator is no longer available, must be removed?

    Maybe not removed, but a license clarification should be sought.
    What do others think?



    --
    http://www.inventati.org/frx/
    There's not a second to spare! To the laboratory! ..................................................... Francesco Poli .
    GnuPG key fpr == CA01 1147 9CD2 EFDF FB82 3925 3E1C 27E1 1F69 BFFE

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

    iQIzBAEBCgAdFiEEygERR5zS79/7gjklPhwn4R9pv/4FAmAItQ0ACgkQPhwn4R9p v/488A//YywgFDA8HXAC2K4T0tmM8rsl1RQ28zCk+8GkHqo6MF30bVkBbrbSxK1W rPXTovTGkvICYqHI9w+stJAKiMhCeGcqtEaVaaHrl3QHD1QGz9sg8IVGZfWtfQSp gN6vtNrEvenuFnRay05vB3HmsRTnwiua8yYtmBdCKXJtDDeHAtOEKFKMGzfyviHX WVMUTQr31JNQE56D0itHVCQt8xs8icA1VoZZk4rAQVfWA50PyUS1dfRCVwMpfak2 m3NyEyW0n1SvFX7En+PJ0xv7WEmrldJpnfokTu9+fqEMn9K565YMBtNi32Aq0PCZ CLpdLVwcmPKcFL6LVaVak3lUvr/gkf+0aqIN9UFheY4D9/hVn667lkl01lY5oxKf 3+p5dMl8EGvLNDf5eCKWHcFvpkBBvVThEuQrAsFyCzDpSGp0WHie/gUtl3vWQbfg eFXhj2NUNmigy1+xNj8V/RfodYgRqGvrDGcc9GU5X/Zm8eXziDKEfMaBBU4kIS2u nvia6MbTsGEM8d1noF0+XWJ1Umja9rBn212Nos7dGooY4M3HwXFt/qymrUSXsRrn pwZ6XmVENYi6ZS2AQpW/aPv6e9MgpTue0I6t2PjhduGBeR6gdHyx7E4Pj2bsWEKr qJVAJR5RfXPWSgd8NfRvAe/IArkuy4Cz