<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">2008/11/11 Ben Laenen <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:benlaenen@gmail.com">benlaenen@gmail.com</a>></span><br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<div class="Ih2E3d">On Tuesday 11 November 2008, H wrote:<br>
> There is no issue for selling a modified thing under CC BY-SA. Only<br>
> in CC BY-NC-SA, there we have to ask the owner about it. Its hence<br>
> not something like CC BY-SA. The term 'without fees' - i believe that<br>
> the license allows only redistribution for free of cost, even with<br>
> modifications. Other than that all, it looks like the DeJaVu<br>
> license.[1]<br>
<br>
</div>With DejaVu you can sell it as part of a "larger" software package (just<br>
like the OFL), whereas this license doesn't seem to allow that.<br>
</blockquote><div><br>Yes, there is certain similarities with both. And none with adobe's and that of CC. Thats what I meant. <br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<br>
btw, "larger software package"... If fonts are software, does that mean<br>
that since we added glyphs to Vera in DejaVu that it would be valid to<br>
sell DejaVu by itself?<br>
</blockquote><div>it says so, i think (i cant look the license now, sorry net is on certain troubles) that when some modifications are done - give it to some one, but not in the name of DeJaVu/Bitstream. <br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<br>
Greetings<br>
<font color="#888888">Ben<br>
</font></blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><br>-- <br>H<br>IRC : HFactor | Phone : 09496346709 | PGP : 4634C034 | W : <a href="http://hiran.in">http://hiran.in</a><br>Bob Hope - "I love to go to Washington - if only to be near my money."