About the license of L10n products

[Chusslove Illich]

(Not-a-lawyer.)

> [: JiHui Choi :]
> I'm trying to make a glossary for Korean amateur translators. [...] If
> each project has their own license for their L10n works [...]

Making a glossary by consulting a body of text is certainly fair use (i.e.
copyright holders of that body of text cannot prohibit it), so you don't
need to care about licencing of translations at all.

> Can I publish and share my glossary under GPL? If I can, which version
> should I use, v3.0 or v2.0? here are several licenses, for GNOME, KDE
> [...]

Given the above, you can publish your glossary under any license you feel
like.

However, glossaries are probably considered databases. This means that e.g.
in USA, anyone could harvest terms from your glossary and use them in any
way they like (e.g. put them in own glossary under a proprietary license),
while in EU your license would have to be respected (since about a decade
ago). So you should check (if you care :) what's the status of copyright on
databases in your legal surroundings.

-- 
Chusslove Illich (Часлав Илић)
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kde/attachments/20091012/a3c125f4/attachment.sig>
-------------- next part --------------
___________________________________________________
This message is from the kde mailing list.
Account management:  https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde.
Archives: http://lists.kde.org/.
More info: http://www.kde.org/faq.html.