[OpenFontLibrary] [GFD] OFL-FAQ update draft and web fonts paper

[Dave Crossland]

The ofl has no upgrade model, the authors have no resources to make an
update, and believe the license provides for this situation.

I will try to make getting addition permission privately a convenient
process for those who must seek such permission, for rfns and trademarks.
On May 29, 2013 1:47 PM, "Vernon Adams" <vern at newtypography.co.uk> wrote:

> I can understand this, except for one thing;
>
> Surely it would not be 'diluting' the OFL to reshape it  to bring more
> clarity to the licensing of this whole 'minor modification' space that
> webfont services are opening up?
> Imo the OFL needs to be ever so slightly tweaked, but only to better
> protect the freedom of OFL'd fonts. That's not a dilution, that's a
> re-concentration.
>
> On the other hand, expecting designers to rely on an external triggers
> such as 'trademarks' to plug this issue, does seem to dilute the license.
>
> -vernon
>
>
>
> On 29 May 2013, at 05:05, Victor Gaultney <vtype at gaultney.org> wrote:
>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Perhaps the authors of the OFL could create such a text?
> >>
> >> I think Victor has been quite clear that he's not at all interested in
> >> diluting the OFL model like this,
> >
> > Yes - for the reasons Dave mentions, and the basic conceptual difficulty
> of defining and evaluating what changes would be allowed.
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/openfontlibrary/attachments/20130529/70eb5a9f/attachment.html>