[OpenFontLibrary] theleagueofmoveabletype.com is switching to the Open Font License

[Dave Crossland]

2009/6/5 ricardo lafuente <bollecs at sollec.org>:
>
> i'd say we could pitch this to most designers who release freeware fonts.

I spent a few days doing this about a year and a half ago; most emails
attached to freeware fonts are now stale, and none of the freeware
font authors I reached were interested in the OFL.

> some might look at it the right way if the arguments for
> open-ness are well-articulated enough.

Well yes, perhaps I'd be better at it a year and a half later :-)

> which reminds me, it would be nice to have a document with a good set of
> arguments clearing out that the OFL doesn't mean people will be able to
> 'steal' your stuff any more than a proprietary license (it will actually
> make you more friends :)

As NS already mentioned, he and I and Ed (and others, I forget) worked
on a ODT/PDF "Go For OFL!" letter which got permission from various
orgs to use their logo to lend credibility to the letter.

> if anyone's also up for it, i'd be interested in group-drafting a FAQ of
> sorts for designers who might be reluctant to step towards libre licensing
> of their work, clearing up common misunderstandings and allaying some fears
> they might have regarding that.

Jump into the wiki :-)

> do you think building up this kind of traditional-designer-oriented
> argumentary makes sense?

Totally :-)

> quick list of designers that could later be approached:
> * Jos Buivenga from exljbris (who releases some fonts as freeware as a
> marketing device for selling extended families)
> * Manfred Klein

I didn't speak to either of these guys.

> * Ray Larabie (the 'free font' legend, maybe he can be convinced to OFL some
> of his older creations?)

I spoke to him; not interested, but kindly explained at length why.

> * LettError (did some funky font experiments, again could be convinced to
> OFL some older stuff)

Erik is on this list; I doubt he would OFL anything, but, I suppose
the "free beer" fonts on the letterror site might have a better
chance.

> * Hoefler and Frere-Jones (this could be a long shot, but they've built such
> a huge collection of work that their older stuff could also be opened up)

They don't even allow embedding outlines in PDFs so, er, good luck :-)

> * House Industries (same as previous)
> * Underware (even a longer shot, but who knows what experiments they might
> have hidden in their drawers)

I've asked some famous type designers about if they have a "secret
stash" of half made type designs in the course of writing a yet to be
published essay, and indeed some do. However, given that the purpose
of this is to have half-formed projects that can be tailored to suit
an incoming brief faster than the competition, I don't see why they
would want to publish these things.

I also think that they will believe they would lose some reputation
for publishing "half-done" stuff.

> i'll shut up for now. Again, most are long shots, but if even one designer
> would consider it, that would be good enough. I would emphasise that
> stepping towards the traditional type designer world would be, IMHO, a good
> if not necessary strategic move for the OFLB and OFL awareness in general.

I think I've reached a conclusion about this. Existing type designers
want to know how they can get paid for doing type design for a living
if they respect users' freedom. And they don't want to know how a
couple can work for me, they want to know how all of the existing ones
can flip their business around and earn they same kind of money. And
the answer is, they can't, and so, they are not interested.

The key word there is, "existing" :-)