<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN"> <HTML><HEAD> <META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=US-ASCII"> <META content="MSHTML 6.00.6000.16788" name=GENERATOR></HEAD> <BODY id=role_body style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: #000000; FONT-FAMILY: Arial" bottomMargin=7 leftMargin=7 topMargin=7 rightMargin=7><FONT id=role_document face=Arial color=#000000 size=2> <DIV>>On Mon, 2008-11-10 at 21:13 -0500, Fontfreedom@aol.com wrote:<BR>>> It's my understanding that anything published in the U.S. before March<BR>>> 1, 1989 without a valid copyright notice is in the public domain.<BR>>> (unless the work was registered with the copyright office, fees paid<BR>>> within a short time period.)<BR>><BR>>Your understanding is incorrect.  Please try to find some more<BR>>reliable sources of information, and don't just paste random<BR>>things vaguely related to fonts here...<BR>><BR>>In more detail... :-)</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I stand by my understanding of US copyright law. Insofar that (Generally) "anything published in the U.S. before March 1, 1989 without a valid copyright notice is in the public domain." Here is a reference:<BR></DIV> <DIV>In the document titled "Copyright Office Basics", created by the:</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>U.S. Copyright Office<BR>101 Independence Avenue SE<BR>Washington, DC 20559-6000 </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>You can find this document by going to <A href="http://www.copyright.gov">www.copyright.gov</A>, and clicking on "Copyright Basics".</DIV> <DIV><A href="http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ1.pdf">http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ1.pdf</A><A href="http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ1.html"></A></DIV> <DIV><BR>It states:</DIV> <DIV> <H2><A name=noc><FONT size=2>Notice of Copyright</FONT></A></H2> <P>The use of a copyright notice is no longer required under U.S. law, although it is often beneficial. Because prior law did contain such a requirement, however, the use of notice is still relevant to the copyright status of older works.</P> <P>Notice was required under the 1976 Copyright Act. This requirement was eliminated when the United States adhered to the Berne Convention, effective March 1, 1989. </P></DIV> <DIV><BR>>Registration affects the sorts of damages that can be claimed in<BR>>the case of wilful infringement, and that is still true in the US<BR>>today.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>>First, fonts in the US are not considered copyrightable works, so it<BR>>cannot possibly make a difference whether or not they were published<BR>>with or without a copyright notice (and you can't register them).<BR></DIV> <DIV>Fonts are copyrightable as software in the U.S. That is the primary intellectual property law protection given to most fonts.</DIV> <DIV><BR>>Second, what does it mean to publish a font?  I'd suggest possibly<BR>>a font sample with a full showing of characters might count, but<BR>>it's really not clear.  The copyright would apply in such a case<BR>>to the layout of the font sampler, and to any text used within it,<BR>>but not to the font itself.<BR>></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>To publish a font:</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Make it avalible to the public for use in it's own documents. Offer it for download, wether or not a fee is involved. I don't really think some "sampler" would be enough to consider a font itself published.</DIV> <DIV><BR>>Now, I am not a lawyer, and in any case what matters is what courts<BR>>decide, so you'd have to look at case law... but the only cases I<BR>>know of were settled out of court.<BR>><BR>>Note also that hinting may be (and in some cases is) protected by<BR>>patent, and font names can be (and usually are) trademarked, and<BR>>also that fonts designed wholly in part outside the US by people<BR>>who were not US citizens at the time are likely to be copyrighted<BR>>by the laws of other countries, and that even for a book, where<BR>>copyright law does apply, publication in the US is not sufficient<BR>>to demonstrate copyright or lack of copyright -- you also have to<BR>>show that the book was (or was not) authorized by the copyright holder.<BR></DIV> <DIV>---------------------</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>>Even if it were legally permissible in the US to distribute pre-1989 <BR>>fonts  without a copyright notice or registered copyright - do you <BR>>believe it would be ethical do this without the designer / font creators <BR>>agreement? Because something may be allowed under the law of a <BR>>particular jurisdiction that does not make it morally and ethically OK.<BR></DIV> <DIV>THAT is a separate question. Is it ethical or morally right to republish anything which is legally in the public domain, a 350 year old book might still have heirs around somewhere wanting a royalty.</DIV></FONT><BR><BR><BR><DIV CLASS="aol_ad_footer" ID="62743fc515b2d3afc22af2c93012d612"><FONT style="color: black; font: normal 10pt ARIAL, SAN-SERIF;"><HR style="MARGIN-TOP: 10px">One site keeps you connected to all your email: AOL Mail, Gmail, and Yahoo Mail. <a href="http://www.aol.com/?optin=new-dp&icid=aolcom40vanity&ncid=emlcntaolcom00000025">Try it now</a>.</FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>