[OpenFontLibrary] PT Sans

[Dave Crossland]

Hi!

2009/12/31 Christoph Schäfer <christoph-schaefer at gmx.de>:
>
> My apologies if this sounds overly aggressive

I don't mind :-)

> but I have been discussing these issues over and over again.
> It really helps to keep things separate ...

:-)

>> Legal texts as published by governments - perhaps, such as in the USA.
>> Legal texts as in literary works that discuss legal topics? Hardly.
>
> A license is not a discussion of a legal topic. An article in a law magazine
> would be.

Although your English is excellent, I'll try to be more careful about
my choice of phrasing.

A license is not a discussion of a legal topic, but a license text
'discusses' ("is about") a legal topic - the copyright status of a
work to which the license applies.

I can imagine that texts submitted to a court for the public record,
or texts published by a government which dedicates all governmental
publications to the public domain, can be referred to as 'legal texts'
and have public domain status.

But I am not sure why a copyright license is given a different status
to any other literary work simply because of its topic.

What is your definition of "legal text"?

> You're wrong, full stop.

I may be wrong, and I welcome being corrected, but you haven't
persuaded me yet.

You accepted that in some jurisdictions, a copyright license is
subject to copyright restrictions as a literary work.

I assert PT Sans is not legally redistributable worldwide, and so I
suggest we do not accept it on OFLB.

I have contacted Paratype, I'll let the list know what they say.

Cheers
Dave