On 8/24/20 4:10 AM, Björn 'besser82' Esser wrote:
> Confirming EUPL 1.2 is "good".
Just a short followup question about the EUPL 1.2 license:
Is it enough, if the upstream author(s) just include their native
language version of the EUPL 1.2 license text, or do we explicitly need
the english version of the license text available for Fedora packaging?
The European Community lists about two dozend different language
versions of the license, which are all considered official [1].
Thanks
Björn
[1]
https://joinup.ec.europa.eu/collection/eupl/eupl-text-eupl-12
I'm not a lawyer or Red Hat employee, but given Fedora is an American
legal entity (tied to Red Hat as a U.S. corporation), I presume English
is the preferred language for licenses.
Since the other languages of the license are recognized as official, I
think it is sufficient to standardize on one language and to use other
translations as a legal reference if it ever mattered for international
jurisdiction (?).
My two cents!
--
Cheers,
Justin W. Flory (he/him)
https://jwf.io
TZ=America/New_York