[2003-06-26] Chris Little wrote: >on 6/26/03 1:24 PM, Alexander Terekhov at [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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 _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
