[odc-discuss] mistake in ODC-AL text?
maurizio.napolitano at okfn.org
Mon Aug 26 06:02:29 UTC 2013
> In general we are somewhat wary about putting up translations because
> translations carry no official status and should not be used to actually
> license stuff :-). This practise follows the FSF approach but differs
> from e.g. Creative Commons. This policy was adopted after some
> discussion the basic issue being of both intentional and unintentional
> changes arising as translation occurred plus the inability of Open Data
> Commons to guarantee the correctness and validity of various different
> Thus for Open Data Commons licenses there is only one version of the
> license and that is the english one.
> Translations are, of course, very welcome since they enable people to
> better understand the basic contents of the license but they should be
> used for guidance purposes and should not be be used for actual
> licensing (for that use the "official" license).
I like this approach and i'm also agree.
In any case i think a section with a list of the unofficial translation
with a introduction like "If you use an odc license you have to use the
official version in english, this section is created only to give the
possibility to understand better the terms of license, but has an
invalid legal meaning" should be usefull.
In this case what is the kind of strategy? We publish the license in a
website (eg. it.okfn.org ) and you link the translation on the official
website or you host the translation in a section "unofficial
translations" or we publish without a reference from the original website?
Thanks a lot!
More information about the odc-discuss