Re: Translations was Re: [Gnumed-devel] Interest in GNUmed

[Jim Busser]

On 2009-10-26, at 3:49 PM, Karsten Hilbert wrote:

> While technically I don't see a problem with that we've been
> discussing licensing implications regarding the translated
> terms without coming to a safe conclusion.

I would have a hard time arguing that the translations (single words  
or short strings of words) need to be kept GPL.

I would accept the argument that it is not the individual translated  
items (words or phrases) that is unique, but the aggregated  
collection, and recognizing that in our case the .po files are mixes  
of clinical words with technical strings – many of which would be  
functional gibberish if transplanted into some other system – I truly  
can't see a problem with the translations being BSD.

If you were wondering about licence conflicts I do not see any reason  
why the project contributors (whose base project code is already GPL)  
could not be argued as capable to make their translation contributions  
dual-licensed i.e.
- BSD for any who would see a value to use the translations
PLUS
- GPL for the .po files as incorporated into the GNUmed CVS (or future  
git) tree.

Do we need to verify this?