[Openfontlibrary] more updates on Open Font Library

[Jon Phillips]

On Mon, 2006-10-23 at 12:11 -0700, Raph Levien wrote:
> I'm going to add my voice to Dave's. The OFL makes sense for fonts.
> GPL has definite shortcomings, as it was intended for code and not
> fonts, andthere are ambiguities in trying to interpret rights for
> stuff like embedding the font in documents and other "works." I
> personally dislike CC licenses because they're not compatible with
> free software releases such as Linux distros.

I need to read up more on this...can you provide some references?
haha...I even work for CC. I have new project coming that will be
influenced by these ideas, so the more I read, the more I influence the
direction of the CC license (hopefully).

> A profusion of licenses is a bad thing, because it discourages sharing
> between fonts. For example, I'm very proud of the auxiliary characters
> in my fonts, like the section mark and so on, and would be delighted
> if other people just used those as long as the styles were compatible.

I completely agree...

> Copyright status of fonts is a very difficult minefield. Here's the
> 10,000 ft overview.
> 
> 1. The _design_ of fonts is technically not copyrightable in the US.
> 
> 2. In practice, the digital representation of fonts is copyrightable.
> The ruling precedent is Judge Whyte's summary judgment in Adobe vs.
> SSI.
> 
> 3. There are other countries in which the designs can be copyrighted
> as well. Thus, any international distribution of fonts must treat them
> as such.
> 
> 4. The _names_ of fonts are trademarkable. In the US, that is one of
> the primary legal weapons. Before releasing a revival of an existing
> font, it is important to check whether the name is trademarked by
> anyone. I've heard that Microsoft spent about the same amount of money
> verifying the trademark status of their new Vista fonts as on their
> development.
> 
> 5. If the original work (75 year old metal, for example), is
> considered to be public domain, then the person creating a digital
> revival has the right to choose the license. Commercial revivals of
> old fonts are very common; an OFL release is just as easy to justify.
> I have done so with my Century Catalogue, and will probably do so with
> others.

Quick, we gotta put these great arguments on our wiki...


> The issue was discussed in some detail on typophile:
> 
> http://typophile.com/node/9296

Very interesting..


> Hope this helps. In sum, I highly recommend OFL, feel that PD makes
> sense, and would not recommend any other license, at least until I
> heard a compelling argument in its favor.
> 
> Raph

Hi oh great forefather of Inkscape :)

So, do you think good to allow both public domain and OFL licensed fonts
in this project? Right now I have public domain turned on and will need
to just add some grease to support OFL.

I agree on your summary.

Others, what do you think? Is it okay to support OFL in addition to
Public Domain? How would this work with distros, people who want to
package up these fonts on CDs, possibly sell them, etc?

I'm all for consolidation, license clarity, and picking and sticking to
a plan to get this show on the road :)

Jon

> On 23 Oct 2006 11:52:43 -0700, George Williams <gww at silcom.com> wrote:
> > On Mon, 2006-10-23 at 04:54, Dave Crossland wrote:
> > > Here's something curious: In the USA typefaces are not copyrightable,
> > > because some old dead dudes said the alphabet was de facto public, and
> > > outside the scope of copyright.
> > "The" alphabet was public? The world has expanded so we now have several
> > alphabets to choose... Are all alphabets public do you think, or only
> > the latin one?
> >
> > Does anyone have a reference to the exact quote? I couldn't figure out
> > how to refine the search sufficiently for google to be useful.
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Openfontlibrary mailing list
> > Openfontlibrary at lists.freedesktop.org
> > http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/openfontlibrary
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Openfontlibrary mailing list
> Openfontlibrary at lists.freedesktop.org
> http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/openfontlibrary
> 
-- 
Jon Phillips

San Francisco, CA
USA PH 510.499.0894
jon at rejon.org
http://www.rejon.org

MSN, AIM, Yahoo Chat: kidproto
Jabber Chat: rejon at gristle.org
IRC: rejon at irc.freenode.net