On 2002.05.17, Patrick May <patrick-may / monmouth.com> wrote:
> She also noted that the translation cannot be released without some
> type of agreement with original rights holder.

There is an agreement with the original rights holder as expressed
in the licensing terms:  the OPL grants everyone a worldwide,
royalty-free license to reproduce in part or whole the works
covered under the OPL as long as the OPL is adhered to.

In the case of a translation, as long as it is made available
under terms that do not conflict with the OPL, then you or anyone
else has the right to do exactly what was done.  Some may consider
it a flaw or weakness of the OPL, others consider it a feature
since anyone is free to take up the responsibility of translating
an OPL'ed work into another language without expressed prior
consent of the original rights holder beyond the OPL.

IANAL, of course.  The OPL seems very liberal and its intent
seems to make works under the OPL very free and with as little
encumberance as possible.  It basically protects the original
rights holder's rights to the original work but gives away
rights to any derivative works as long as the original rights
holder is credited and the new work doesn't violate the OPL
itself.

As much as I dislike parts of the GPL, the GFDL seems quite
reasonable for protecting non-software works.

-- Dossy

-- 
Dossy Shiobara                       mail: dossy / panoptic.com 
Panoptic Computer Network             web: http://www.panoptic.com/ 
  "He realized the fastest way to change is to laugh at your own
    folly -- then you can let go and quickly move on." (p. 70)