Re: [boost] Re: Fw: [cxxpanel] SCO own copyright on C/C++!

From: Beman Dawes (bdawes_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-12-29 10:44:30

At 01:20 AM 12/29/2003, David B. Held wrote:
 >"Alexander Terekhov" <terekhov_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
 >news:3FEDBE73.6FA9EBA2_at_web.de...
 >> [...]
 >> Blake Stowell: C++ is one of the properties that SCO owns
 >> today and we frequently are approached by customers who
 >> wish to license C++ from us and we do charge for that. Those
 >> arrangements are done on a case-by-case basis with each
 >> customer and are not disclosed publicly. C++ licensing is
 >> currently part of SCO's SCOsource licensing program.
 >> [...]
 >
 >What exactly does it mean for the C++ language to be an
 >intellectual property?  Does that mean that you need a license
 >write a compiler for it?  To write about the language itself?
 >Does it have a well-defined legal meaning at all?

The document Boosters use is the C++ Standard, which is copyright ISO/IEC, 
with acknowledgements (1.10) to books copyright by AT&T and PJ Plauger. ISO 
holds copyright assignments from them, and from people like me who 
contributed wording to the standard.

ISO/IEC will presumably take whatever steps they think are needed to 
protect their copyright.

All of that is perhaps interesting, but it is really off-topic for Boost. 
So this discussion should move to comp.lang.c++.moderated, or perhaps some 
forum dealing with copyright law.

--Beman