On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 2:36 AM, Patrice-Emmanuel Schmitz < pe.schm...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> I believe that you are right when categorizing the EUPL linguistic > versions as mere translation, even if the design of the license is in fact > compatible with porting (i.e. stating that the applicable law and the > competent court are those of the state of the licensor). It would be interesting (though perhaps off-topic for this list) to have license authors create a list of the factors that are important to minimize the need for porting. Luis
_______________________________________________ License-discuss mailing list License-discuss@opensource.org http://projects.opensource.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss
