As Unicode will actually not encode the language itself, but just the characters there's no problem at all in terms of IP, except for the representative glyphs if they use the protected graphic designs.
Everything else is free, including the name that Unicode will choose for designating the character names, or the single English term for designating the script itself. Then what will be challenging is not to support the script in software, but render it with fonts. If people use the script to create their own texts in this script, their text will be free, but it will not be possible to get it rendered wit hthe protected glyph designs. But supporters will be inventive and will create their own designs. So the final thing which will be difficult for encoding the script will be to produce a glyph chart in the standard and publish it under the Unicode or ISO copyright. I assume that this chart will require approval by the IP holder or some fair (but permanent) licencing to Unicode and ISO. For other users of the standard, they are in a position equivalent to other scripts, where charts are **also** protected by the copyright of the standard and the rights attached to the fonts used and embedded in the PDF documents: they cannot use the glyphs directly to derive their fonts. They have to create and support fonts with their own designs. Then whever the script will be used in texts conveying protected works in the matching language, or for representing texts in unrelated languages will have no importance : The IP rights supposedly attached to the "language" are in the works published and they must be significantly large enough and inventive to be subject to a copyright, or a patent right, or to a "sui generi" database right, or must have a valid registration in an applicable registry to be subject to a trademark right. But even if these rights exist, they won't cover the individual characters, and the Unicode character database or standard (that will reference some elements related to the original work covered by IP) are separate creations/inventions not covered by any earlier rights: this is only a very small set of external references and if Paramount claims that these references as infringing, they can be as well removed: we don't really need direct references to Paramount (not even by an URL or some other hypertext link). If Paramount refuses to be cited, then it could just stop its own activities, as no one will be able to talk and advertize their works that will be unsellable... I doubt it will ever occur, however we should honor the correct credits (fair and anyway required for any citations).
