2010/11/9 Rimas Kudelis <rq@akl.lt>:
Talking about this, would it perhaps be possible to license oficial builds
differently than source code? Instead of telling the user to agree to a
source license, we could probably present them with a short, understandable
and localized EULA.
LGPL is not an EULA. In fact I don't think we need an EULA. The users
should be informed about their rights but they can install and use
LibreOffice even if they don't accept LGPL. LGPL says nothing about
installing and using free software, everyone is free to do that. Its
terms should be followed only in case of redistribution and
modification.
However, if this is not possible, here's an alternate proposal: how about we
prepend the license with a localized string that would contain short
localized summary of the license, and explain in a few words that the
license itself is in English and that only English text is legally binding.
+1 (license.html, license.txt etc.)
Andras
--
E-mail to l10n+help@libreoffice.org for instructions on how to unsubscribe
List archives are available at http://www.libreoffice.org/lists/l10n/
All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Context
Privacy Policy |
Impressum (Legal Info) |
Copyright information: Unless otherwise specified, all text and images
on this website are licensed under the
Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License.
This does not include the source code of LibreOffice, which is
licensed under the Mozilla Public License (
MPLv2).
"LibreOffice" and "The Document Foundation" are
registered trademarks of their corresponding registered owners or are
in actual use as trademarks in one or more countries. Their respective
logos and icons are also subject to international copyright laws. Use
thereof is explained in our
trademark policy.