[OpenFontLibrary] [GFD] Treatment of the OFL in the wild

[Victor Gaultney]

Nicolas -

> When I pushed for Fedora to officially endorse the OFL, it was very clear
> in my mind that embedding was still a distribution of the font bits, and
> that the OFL embedding clause merely stated there was a requirement
> boundary between the embedded font and the rest of the document.

The terms 'embedding' and 'distribution' have very specific meanings in the OFL context, and are mutually exclusive. Here is a slightly expand form of what is said in the FAQ:

Embedding = inclusion of font data solely for purposes of viewing that one enclosing document, and in a way that makes extraction difficult or clearly discouraged.

Distribution= inclusion of font data with the intention of allowing it to be used for other docs, or in a way that makes extraction and redistribution easy.

Embedding allows for greater freedom to modify a font (subsetting in particular, but also format changes, such as TT data to PS data) without triggering things like RFN-related name changes. It is most appropriate in situations where extraction of the font is impossible, or difficult, or clearly obstructed. A good example of this a font that is subset to include only the glyphs needed for that document, so reconstructing the original font is not possible.

Distribution makes a clear distinction between the document and the font, and so must follow the same rules as any other way of distributing the font.

Years ago, because of technical constraints, almost every example of inclusion qualified as 'embedding'. Now, because of technological changes, more and more instances of inclusion resemble traditional distribution. If you include a font in a doc in a way such that the font can be trivially extracted, whole and complete, then it is your responsibility to be sure that license data remains intact.

> I'm quite saddened the OFL FAQ has been used since to twist the license
> meaning, without any public debate and just for convenience.

I'm sorry that you feel the FAQ has been used to twist the meaning of the license. The sections in the FAQ regarding embedding have been there since 2010, were discussed at the time, and have not changed in their interpretation since then. The widespread adoption of the OFL by both designers and users has mostly happened since then, so the very broad community has accepted the licence with full knowledge of this interpretation. 

Thanks,

Victor
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/openfontlibrary/attachments/20130607/6174fb37/attachment.html>