On Fri, 2007-03-16 at 11:02 -0700, Thomas Chung wrote:
On 3/16/07, Thomas Canniot <thomas.canniot(a)laposte.net> wrote:
> Well, I don't know if translating a licence can be considered as valid.
> In French, a licence / law translation is not considered as valid due to
> numerous misinterpretations.
True. I would suggest to check with Max and Red Hat Legal Counsel.
We've discussed the translation of legal content before.
The problem is more than just one of languages. Laws must be translated
(interpreted), and in many cases, the legal provisions may not apply the
same in all countries.
That is the main catch -- a language /= a country. The CLA, for
example, is written to be legally binding in only one country, despite
how many countries speak/read English as a primary language.
A process to translate documents so they could be legally useful (or
even binding) might look like this:
1. Trusted translators make initial translation
- For Red Hat, it might be best if they used their translation staff
2. The original and translation are read by a lawyer who reads both
languages, who understands the original documents intents, and who
understands the local laws. This person most likely needs to be
licensed to practice law in the target country.
4. Result - one, new, translated document that is legally binding in one
If you want to take the translation and apply it to another country,
start from Step 2. and proceed.
The cost per country is not-trivial.
Anyway, the main point is, this is not something Fedora can do. We
don't have lawyers or resources to hire foreign lawyers.
Karsten Wade, RHCE, 108 Editor ^ Fedora Documentation Project
Sr. Developer Relations Mgr. | fedoraproject.org/wiki/DocsProject
| gpg key: AD0E0C41