Re: [boost] Re: Draft of new Boost Software License

From: Rene Rivera (grafik.list_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-06-26 14:29:45

[2003-06-26] Chris Little wrote:

>on 6/26/03 1:24 PM, Alexander Terekhov at terekhov_at_[hidden] wrote:
>
>> 
>> Howard Hinnant wrote:
>>> 
>>> Since boost is a spring board for standardization of a library, I'm
>>> wondering if the boost license requires the copyright notice to follow
>>> for other implementations which follow the interface of the boost
>>> library, but independently develop the implementation?
>>> 
>>> In other words, if we standardize a boost library, will the library's
>>> copyright notice have to be in all implementations of that std::lib?
>> 
>> http://digital-law-online.info/lpdi1.0/treatise23.html
>> http://digital-law-online.info/lpdi1.0/treatise27.html
>> 
>>> Will the copyright need to appear in the standard itself?
>> 
>> Uhmm, why would you care?
>
>Howard writes the standard library for Metrowerks as well as sitting on the
>standards committee so I'm sure he's wondering about what happens in the
>future.

I would think that since the Library Proposal of the interface is a separate
document than the Boost implementation+docs of that interface they would
have different licenses. And therefore not present a problem when the
Library Proposal is accepted as then some sort of license transfer to the
standards organization would happen.

But I guess Beman should bring that up with the lawyers also ;-)

-- grafik - Don't Assume Anything
-- rrivera (at) acm.org - grafik (at) redshift-software.com
-- 102708583 (at) icq