Date: 2020-09-01 13:50:45
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Boost <boost-bounces_at_[hidden]> On Behalf Of Peter Dimov via Boost
> Sent: 1 September 2020 14:17
> To: boost_at_[hidden]
> Cc: Peter Dimov <pdimov_at_[hidden]>
> Subject: Re: [boost] Boost.Text Unicode licence issues
> Paul A Bristow wrote:
> > I sense it is unlikely that we would get a definitive legal opinion,
> > even after paying money, for a
> license detail that is clearly ill-defined.
> I agree. The proper role of our legal representative - if we had one - in this case would not be
> us with legal advice, but to contact the legal representative of the Unicode Consortium, explain
> situation (Boost does not allow libraries that impose an attribution requirement for binaries,
> its face precludes us ever having a Unicode library), ask them to maybe consider dropping that
> requirement from their license, failing that, ask them for an explicit permission for Boost
libraries to use
> their data files without such a license requirement, failing that, ask them for a clear and an
> statement that they do stand by this license requirement.
Ok with this - but, since we do not have a legal representative, can someone else write 'officially'
One of the steering group?
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk