From: Beman Dawes (bdawes_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-11-19 20:15:09
At 09:38 AM 11/19/2002, Andrew Koenig wrote:
>Beman> Even something in the public domain should have a copyright, and a
>Beman> license that says it is in the public domain.
>I think you should check this statement with a lawyer.
I'd really like a knowledgeable intellectual property lawyer to review all
Boost related license issues. But finding one willing to help has been a
problem. Suggestions would be welcome.
> Keith Gorlen,
>the author of the NIH (National Institutes of Health) class library,
>told me once that his work, being a ``US Government work'' is in the
>public domain and *cannot* be copyrighted or licensed. That is,
>*nothing* that anyone does with his work can legally prevent anyone
>from copying it, so there is no meaningful way of licensing it.
If I understand correctly, what was being requested was that it be possible
to clearly associate each file with its legal status. So in the case you
mention, I guess they would want to see a notice to the effect it was
a "US Government work" and that it was in the public domain.
We know some potential Boost users are delaying use of the libraries
because of uncertainty about legal issues. We would like to address those
issues, but really need help from a knowledgeable lawyer to do so.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk