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

[Khaled Hosny]

Why do you think the font name is so important that to keep using it
those evil corporations will go out of their ways and sign deals with
you? (not to mention that it is the copyleft part of OFL that ensures
preservation of font freedom, not the RFN part).

Regards,
Khaled

On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 07:21:53AM -0700, Vernon Adams wrote:
> The RFN can have an integral role in how a designer can preserve or enhance a certain type of freedom for a font. Or it simply restrict a font's freedom. I'm still arguing with myself about it :)
> 
> Reserving the name of the font, sets down a licensing condition that must be met. If that condition is not met then the license is breached.
> This is clear when dealing with 1 or 2 a large corporations (who may not be interested in preserving the font's freedom); as it gives  3 clear solutions for them to use their own modified version of a font;
> 1. Follow the OFL, use the font, change the font's name , and preserve the font's freedom.
> 2. Follow the OFL, use the font, get an agreement from me to use the RFN, and preserve the font's freedom.
> 3. Buy an embedding license from me, use the font non-free, and i preserve the font's freedom.
> 
> Now, with a few large corporations, this is highly manageable. But what happens with the mass of individual users and or small businesses, who maybe are also making modifications and serving the font ?
> Of course, i can simply decide to ignore the potential mass of individual breaches of non-changing of RFN's, and instead simply focus on the few 'major' breaches. Bit of a license fudge tho imo.
> 
> The argument i have with myself is; why do i feel the use of RFN's is not necessary when dealing with masses of individual users, but i feel i want it there in case of corporate users?
> It could be that i see that corporate users could easilly afford to buy (modestly priced) RFN agreements from me (if they need to use the fonts), thus 'giving something back' to the designer of the free fonts they are using, and funding future fonts.
> 
> -v
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On 23 May 2013, at 02:56, Pablo Impallari <impallari at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > > You know, we have the situation at present where at least one major corp is using my fonts in their services
> > > They are modifying and using the RFN without agreement from me.
> > 
> > I have the same concerns as Vernon.
> > I'm getting the feeling that removing the RFM will allow Adobe and MT to do whatever they want without agreement from us.