[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

Re: ISO repents

• To: John Cowan <jcowan@r...>
• Subject: Re: ISO repents
• From: Dave Beckett <dave.beckett@b...>
• Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2003 09:43:12 +0100
• Cc: xml-dev@l...
• In-reply-to: <20030930170706.GH19883@s...>
• References: <3F799BD5.1030508@a...> <20030930163349.6162b7b3.dave.beckett@b...> <20030930170706.GH19883@s...>

On Tue, 30 Sep 2003 13:07:07 -0400
John Cowan <jcowan@r...> wrote:

> Dave Beckett scripsit:
> 
> >   The incorporation of the complete ISO 3166-1 standard document in commercial products may be
> >   subject to a charge.
> 
> The operative word is "complete"; if you add the standard as an appendix to
> a book, for example, you have to pay a royalty for it, like any other kind
> of proprietary content.

It's still rather uncertain.  The list of codes is the complete standard
as far as I'm concerned.  This is mostly widely available as a document
on their web site.  So if I put this complete document in my software
(software source is a document) it begs the question still of whether
that is allowed.  In my case, I ship free software which comes with
source so it's more clear that their document might be "in" my product.

I'm pretty sure they aren't refering to the physical standard document in
paper form, since you can buy PDFs of these things.  So what are
the terms of "incorporation"?

The "commercial" word is a red herring from my point of view; I don't
limit or even check (even if that were possible) what use people are
making of my software but people are using it for profit.  I don't
presently charge for it, but the above phrase would restrict me or
anyone else including the codes and doing so.

Dave

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: ISO repents
    • From: John Cowan <cowan@m...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Managing Innovation
• Next by Date: Re: Managing Innovation
• Previous by thread: Re: Managing Innovation
• Next by thread: Re: ISO repents
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread