French GPL-compatible License

Alexandre Dulaunoy alexandre.dulaunoy at
Mon Jul 12 07:24:19 UTC 2004

On Mon, 12 Jul 2004, Ricardo Andere de Mello wrote:

> Brazil had some legal issues regarding to GPL, mainly because it says
> for example that the distributor is not responsible for the software
> (like "provided as is"), but in brazilian law there are some severe laws
> to protect consumers that does not allow this.

In the GNU  General Public License (11. and 12.),  there is a specific
note for  that : TO THE  EXTENT PERMITTED BY APPLICABLE  LAW (11.) and

I don't think this was a real issue.

> Another problem is that only foreign licenses with translations made by
> official law translators are valid, and FSF was not accepting other
> versions of the GPL than the english version.
> that's wy we created the CC-GPL

Are  you sure  that the  translation is  expressing correctly  the GNU
General  Public License  ?  If the  case  is outside  the Brazil  (for
example the major  author is outside Brazil), which  version will they
use ?

The translation starts like a good objective but this is a major issue
because  of  adding  a  layer complexity.  Compatibility  between  the
translated version  and the case law  that will sometimes  uses one of
the translation or the original version. This is a real mess.

Having a single legal text *is really good point*.

Regarding  the CCs,  the  GNU  General Public  License  is better  for
software (and  functionnal) author works. For example,  the NoDeriv or
NC  option  is clearly  non-free  for  software  and computer  program
(doesn't  respect  the 4  freedoms).  Attribution  and Share-Alike  is
respected by the GNU General Public License.

Just my 0.02 EUR,


** Alexandre Dulaunoy (adulau) **** **** 0x44E6CBCD
**/ "To  disable the  Internet to  save EMI  and Disney  is  the moral
**/ equivalent of burning down the library of Alexandria to ensure the
**/ livelihood of monastic scribes." Jon Ippolito.

More information about the Discussion mailing list