[OpenFontLibrary] PT Sans

[James Cloos]

There have been discussions online going back at least twenty-five years
now on the question of whether a licence can be covered by copyright.
(I do remember at least one such debate during my undergrad days.)

The usual argument against -- from a US perspective -- is to question
whether a licence is a creative work.  Or sufficiently creative.  This
is /similar/ to the question of when a patch to an existing code base
becomes big enough to qualify for copyright.

Most of the debates I've perused (all as they happened) bogged down
before they petered out, and I cannot even begin to guess how many --
or how *few* -- lawyers were involved in them or quoted by them.

The arguments also covered the fact that most licenses and contracts
are based on some pre-existing license or contract.  It may not even
be possible to create one out of whole cloth.  At least by anyone w/
enough legal training to be licensed to practice law.

It certainly would be interesting to see the prcedental case law on
the subject.  And how it compares to the other common law countries.

-JimC
-- 
James Cloos <cloos at jhcloos.com>         OpenPGP: 1024D/ED7DAEA6