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
>> 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.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk