In article <cv3ce4-utc.ln1@g...>, 
simon@j... says...
> in message <MPG.207cba3f38602069989718@n...>, Grant Robertson
> ('bogus@b...') wrote:
> 
> > I want to give it away for free. But, in order to do that, I have to
> > ensure that it will stay free.
> 
> Seriously, if you want that, the solution is one of:
> 
> The GPL <URL:http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl.html> - not designed for this
> sort of thing, but with real legal teeth.

I have been considering this. I haven't had time to really study either 
GPL v2 or GPL v3 to see if it would really meet my needs. Remember, a 
standard is not code. So many aspects of GPL would not apply


> GNU Free Documentation License <URL:http://www.gnu.org/licenses/fdl.html> -
> designed for this sort of thing, and with the firepower of the FSF behind
> it.
> Creative Commons <URL:http://creativecommons.org/> - pick-n-mix licensing
> which should do more or less what you want but legally less tested. 

Nor is a standard simple documentation. Neither of these would apply. I 
have been told by an IP expert that copyright only protects the text of 
the code not the algorithm. In this case, it would only protect the text 
of the documentation of the standard, not the ideas and principles of the 
standard.