Re: question about license of unofficial translation of GPL as a sample text in dbacl (Re: notmuch users: how do you filter debbugs?)

[ng0]

Adonay Felipe Nogueira <address@hidden> writes:

> [ Unknown signature status ]
> If I'm not mistaken, translations of the GNU GPL are not legally binding
> if they are presented by themselves.
>
> One must note that when the translation text is preceded by a section
> written in the license's original language that instructs the reader to
> take the original one as valid, then the project does become under that
> license.
>
> Distinction must also be made between the license and its notice below
> copyright notice. As far as my limited knowledge goes, the license
> notice of the GNU GPL can be translated.
>
> However, translating license notices for other licenses that don't
> implement short notices is risky because you would be translating the
> license itself.
>
> Examples of licenses that allow short license notices: Almost all
> licenses from the GNU project, Apache License.
>
> After the license notice, of course, the project can take the time and
> space to write more elaborated text on what are the rights and
> obligations of the user, as long as the writer warns that this
> explanation isn't legally binding too, and that the reader must read the
> original license to know more.

Does this even apply when the license serves as a sample text?
The source we are talking about:
http://dbacl.sourceforge.net/ | https://github.com/krig/dbacl
https://github.com/krig/dbacl/blob/master/doc/japanese.txt (might not
represent what I have in the tarball)
and sample6 I deleted is this one:
https://github.com/krig/dbacl/blob/master/doc/sample6.txt
--