[OpenFontLibrary] GPL fonts! (Was: Open Font Library submissions)

[Dave Crossland]

2008/11/10 Ben Weiner <ben at readingtype.org.uk>:
> Dave Crossland wrote:
>
>> I would also want to see the fonts follow the recommendation of the
>> FSF (the GPL's authors) and add the "font exception"
>
> Is this a concrete recommendation of FSF?

Yes. I am hopeful that if this community can create a "How to ideally
apply to GPL to fonts" document, the FSF might publish it themselves.

The name "exception" is a misnomer; really it is an "additional
permission." The GPLv3 provides explicit confirmation in its license
text about how additional permissions work.

>> However, there are other issues with the GPL for fonts. I've been
>> talking to Nicolas Spalinger offlist about the ideal way to apply the
>> GPL to fonts, so I think I'll go and bring all that discussion up to
>> date and on to this list, and ask the Bolt Cutter Design studio to
>> make their excellent range of fonts a 'case study' example in GPL best
>> practices
>
> Excellent. Am I correct in thinking that would give us:
>
> - OFL: feels like a regular font, but doesn't have embedding restrictions
> (you can send it to a printer or distribute it as part of a brand identity,
> ideally using the OFLB site URL for the typeface to save email bloat).
> - GPL: spreads freedom wherever it goes, requires documents made with the
> font to be licensed in a similar manner (weird for many people, but could
> have interesting and beneficial consequences - nobody's really suggested any
> though, dare I say it)
> - GPL plus font exception: spreads freedom, but without making a designer or
> author who uses the font have to think about licenses.

And don't forget,

- Public Domain: Do anything you want.

I think requiring the font exception would be ideal - ie, removing the
2nd category above.

It is true that there are a few fonts out there without it. For
example, the largest collection I know of are the URW fonts that are
distributed as part of Ghostscript, which predate the "font
exception." These fonts have been extended heavily by the Polish TeX
Users Group GUST, but they have sadly made a huge mistake and try to
distribute their modified fonts under a different license. That is
still being resolved, slowly, and part of the resolution will be, I
hope, to add the font exception and upgrade to GPLv3.

Bolt Cutter Design have just published lots of GPLv3-only fonts, but I
hope they will add the font exception. Our OFLB community member Hiran
V recently published a GPLv3+FE font on his blog. The Linux Libertine
font was published with the GPLv2+FE, and then started dual licensing
with the OFL. I personally will publish my fonts with GPLv3+FE, and me
working to add GPL functionality to OFLB was waiting on me having a
font to publish. The Tiersas (sp) fonts were GPLv3+FE.

So it seems that there are lots of people who prefer the GPL's "strong
copyleft" over the OFL's "weak copyleft," and who are willing to make
the GPL as close to the OFL as possible, such as adding additional
permission for embedding fonts in PDFs. The GPLv3 has additional
"compatible" requirements that are in the OFL, such as renaming. That
is what we ought to discuss.

-- 
Regards,
Dave