pedz@bobkat.UUCP (03/24/87)
Please notice that this article is posted to two groups: comp.text and
misc.legal. The topic deals with a legal question about typesetter
fonts. For those who do not know, Metafont is a program use to
describe a typesetter's font. In the past this has been done by hand
by artists. I presume that the fonts made by such artists has a
copyright assiciated with it. Thus I am sure it is illegal to
duplicate a font by hand and sell it just as it is illegal to copy a
book or a painting and sell it.
However, I am wondering if I took the time and created a Metafont
description a font and that font was purposely identical (or as close
as I could get) to Times Roman (for example), could I use those fonts?
Could I sell the Metafont descriptions of the fonts (to people who
would then use the fonts created by them)? In the world of type
fonts, the differences between them are quite subtle. How different
do they have to be before they are considered independent creations?
--
Cute signature line employing many literary allusions and puns.
Standard disclaimer concerning my mental incompetance.
Perry Smith a.k.a. (Pedz Thing)
pedz@bobkat or {ti-csl,infotel}!pollux!bobkat!pedzhollaar@utah-cs.UUCP (03/24/87)
In article <792@bobkat.UUCP> pedz@bobkat.UUCP (Pedz Thing) writes: > I presume that the fonts made by such artists has a >copyright assiciated with it. Thus I am sure it is illegal to >duplicate a font by hand and sell it just as it is illegal to copy a >book or a painting and sell it. The situation regarding copyrightablity of typeface designs under the 1976 Copyright Act is not clear. While the Act provides for copyright protection for original pictorial, graphic, and sculptural works [Sec 102(a)(5)], in the report of the House of Representatives that accompanied the bill that became the Copyright Act of 1976, they said: "The Committee has considered, but chosen to defer, the possibility of protecting the design of typefaces. ... The Committee does not regard the design of typeface ... to be copyrightable 'pictorial, graphic, or sculptural' work within the meaning of this bill ..." Regarding the prior (1909) copyright act, the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals concluded that a typeface was not a "work of art" and could not be protected by copyright. Since the Fourth Circuit made its decision based on the old copyright act, and the House Committee report is not law (but indicates legislative intent), it's not clear the copyright protection applies to fonts, but there are certainly good arguments that it doesn't.
patwood@unirot.UUCP (03/25/87)
As of right now, the current opinion is that fonts cannot be copyrighted. They can be trademarked, however, so if you created a font that was exactly the same as Times Roman, you couldn't call it that because the name is owned by Allied-Linotype. As long as you aren't working from the original digital data that produced the font, the result isn't covered by copyright protection. Similarly, if an artist created a font by hand using a printed representation of a font, the result isn't a violation of copyright law. Note that several contries outside the U.S. (e.g., Germany) have copyright laws that specifically address typefaces. For more information on this issue, I suggest you read Charles Bigelow's article in the upcoming issue of the PostScript Language Journal. Pat Wood Editor, The PostScript Language Journal
patwood@unirot.UUCP (03/25/87)
Never mind; I'll post the article here over the weekend. Pat Wood
patwood@unirot.UUCP (03/25/87)
What the hell, let's do it now...
The following is an article published in an upcoming issue of the
PostScript Language Journal. Since a similar version of this was
posted by Charles about a year ago to the net, I don't think I'm
doing my readers a disservice in distributing it here prior to the
mailing of the Journal. I think this article covers the issues better
than anything I've seen on the subject of typeface protection.
Pat Wood
Editor, The PostScript Language Journal
-------------------------cut here and nroff/troff------------------------
.ds rg \u\\s-3\(rg\\s+3\d
.ce 3
COMMENTARY
Typeface Protection
By Charles Bigelow
.H 1 Preamble
The main question of typeface protection is: \(``Is there anything there
worth protecting?\('' To that the answer must certainly be: \(``Yes.
Typeface designs are a form of artistic and intellectual property.\(''
To understand this better, it is helpful to look at who designs type,
and what the task requires.
.H 1 "Who Makes Type Designs?"
Like other artistic forms, type is created by skilled artisans. They may
be called type designers, lettering artists, punch-cutters, calligraphers,
or related terms, depending on the milieu in which the designer works and
the technology used for making the designs or for producing the type.
.P
\(``Type designer\('' and \(``lettering artist\('' are self-explanatory terms.
\(``Punch-cutter\('' refers to the traditional craft of cutting the master image
of a typographic letter at the actual size on a blank of steel that is
then used to make the matrix from which metal type is cast. Punch-cutting
is an obsolete though not quite extinct craft. Seeking a link to the tradition,
modern makers of digital type sometimes use the anachronistic term
\(``digital punch-cutter\(''. \(``Calligrapher\('' means literally
\(``one who makes beautiful marks\(''.
The particular marks are usually hand-written
letters, though calligraphers may design type, and type designers may do
calligraphy.
.P
It usually takes about seven years of study and practice to become a
competent type designer. This seems to be true whether one has a Phd. in
computer science, an art-school diploma, or no academic degree. The skill
is acquired through study of the visual forms and practice in making them.
As with geometry, there is no royal road.
.P
The designing of a typeface can require several months to several years.
A family of typefaces of four different styles, say roman, italic,
bold roman, and bold italic, is a major investment of time and effort.
Most type designers work as individuals. A few work in partnership (Times
Roman\*(rg, Helvetica\*(rg, and Lucida\*(rg were all, in different ways, the
result of design collaboration.) In Japan, the large character sets
required for a typeface containing Kanji, Katakana, and Hirakana
induce designers to work in teams of several people.
.P
Although comparisons with other media can only be approximate, a typeface
family is an accomplishment on the order of a novel, a feature film
screenplay, a computer language design and implementation, a major
musical composition, a
monumental sculpture, or other artistic or technical endeavors that
consume a year or more of intensive creative effort. These other creative
activities can be protected by copyright or other forms of intellectual
property protection. It is reasonable to protect typefaces in the same
way.
.H 1 "The Problem of Plagiarism"
A lack of protection for typeface designs leads to plagiarism, piracy, and
related deplorable
activities. They are deplorable because they harm a broad range of
people beyond the original designers of the type. First, most type
plagiarisms are badly done. The plagiarists do not understand the nature
of the designs they are imitating, are unwiling to spend the necessary
time and effort to do good work, and consequently botch the job. They then
try to fob off their junk on unsuspecting users (authors, editors, and
readers). Without copyright, the original designer cannot require the
reproducer of a type to do a good job of reproduction. Hence, type quality
is degraded by unauthorized copying.
.P
Secondly, without protection, designs may be freely imitated; the
plagiarist robs the original designer of financial compensation for the
work. This discourages creative designers from entering and working in the
field. As the needs of typography change (on-line documents and laser printing
are examples of technical and conceptual changes) new kinds of
typefaces are required. Creative design in response to such needs
cannot flourish without some kind of encouragement for the creators. In a
capitalist society, the common method is property rights and profit.
In a socialist
(or, in the past, royalist) society, the state itself might employ type
artists. France, as a monarchy and as a republic has had occasional state
sponsorship of typeface design over the past 400 years. The Soviet Union
has sponsored the design of new typefaces, not only in the Cyrillic alphabet,
but also in the other exotic scripts used by various national groups in the
Soviet Union.
.P
Those who would justify plagiarism often claim that the type
artists do not usually receive a fair share of royalties anyway, since
they have usually sold their designs to some large, exploitive corporation.
It is true that type designers, like many artists,
are often exploited by their \(``publishers\('', but plagiarism exacerbates the
problem. Plagiarism deprives the designer of decent revenues because it diverts
profits to those who merely copied the designs. Plagiarism gives the manufacturer
yet another excuse to reduce the basic royalty or other fee paid for
typeface designs; the theme song is that the market determines
the value of the design and cheap rip-offs debase the market value of a face.
For those interested in the economic effects of piracy, it is clear that
plagiarism of type designs ultimately hurts individual artists far more than
it hurts impersonal corporations.
.H 1 "Kinds of Protection for Type"
There are five main forms of protection for typefaces:
.sp .5
.ta .25i
.nf
1. Trademark
2. Copyright
3. Patent
4. Trade Secret
5. Ethics
.fi
\fBTrademark\fP. A trademark protects the \fBname\fR
of a typeface. In the U.S., most
trademarks are registered with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. The
R in a circle \*(rg after a trademark or tradename indicates U.S.
registration. The similarly placed \u\s-3TM\s+3\d indicates that a trademark is
claimed, even if not yet officially registered. However, a trademark may
be achieved through use and practice, even without registration. Owners of
trademarks maintain ownership by use of the trademark and by litigation to
prevent infringement or unauthorized use of the trademark by others.
.P
As a few examples of registered typeface trademarks, there are Times Roman
(U.S. registration 417,439, October 30, 1945 to Eltra Corporation, now
part of Allied); Helvetica (U.S. Registration 825,989, March 21, 1967, also to
Eltra-Allied), and Lucida (U.S. reg. 1,314,574 to Bigelow & Holmes). Most
countries offer trademark registration and protection, and it is common
for a typeface name to be registered in many countries. In some cases the
registrant may be different than the originator. For example, The Times New
Roman (Times Roman) was originally produced by the English Monotype
Corporation. In England and Europe, most typographers consider the design
to belong to Monotype but the trademark was
registered by Linotype (Eltra-Allied) in the U.S., as noted above.
.P
Trademark protection does not protect the design, only the name.
Therefore, a plagiarism of a design is usually christened with a pseudonym
that in some way resembles or suggests the original trademark, without
actually infringing on it. Resemblance without infringement can be a fine
distinction.
.P
Some pseudonyms for Times Roman are: \(``English Times\('', \(``London\('',
\(``Press Roman\('', \(``Tms Rmn\(''.
Some for Helvetica are \(``Helios\('', \(``Geneva\('', \(``Megaron\('',
\(``Triumvirate\(''. So far, there seem to be none for Lucida. There are
generic typeface classifications used by typographers and type historians
to discuss styles, trends, and categories of design. Occasionally these
apparently innocuous classification systems are employed by plagiarists
to devise generic pseudonyms, such as \(``Swiss 721\('' for Helvetica, and
\(``Dutch 801\('' for Times Roman. It is not certain whether this usage of a
generic classification is more for clarification or for obfuscation. In
general, the proper tradename is a better indicator of identity, quality,
and provenience in typefaces than a generic name. Some people believe that
the same is true for other commodities such as wine, where taste is important.
.P
A trademark usually consists of both a proprietary and a generic part.
For example, in the name \(``Lucida Bold Italic\('', \(``Lucida\('' is the proprietary
trademark part and \(``Bold Italic\('' is the generic part. The generic word
\(``type\('' is usually understood to be a part of the name,
e.g. \(``Lucida Bold Italic type\(''.
Sometimes a firm will append its name or a trademarked
abbreviation of it to the typeface name, to achieve a greater degree of
proprietary content, e.g. \(``B&H Lucida Bold Italic\(''.
.P
A related matter is the use of the name of a type's designer. A firm that
ethically licenses a typeface will often cite the name of the designer \(em
e.g. Stanley Morison (with Victor Lardent) for Times Roman, Max Miedinger
(with Edouard Hoffmann) for Helvetica, Charles Bigelow and Kris Holmes for
Lucida. Although a person's name is not usually a registered trademark,
there are common law restrictions on its use. The marketing of
plagiarized type designs generally omits the names of the designers.
.P
Although Trademark is an incomplete kind of protection, it is used
effectively (within its limitations) to prevent the theft of type names.
Certain traditional typeface names, usually the surnames of illustrious
designers like Garamond, Caslon, Baskerville,
Bodoni, and others have become generic names in the public domain.
Trademark protection of such names requires the addition of some
proprietary word(s), as with these hypothetical creations,
\(``Acme New Garamond\('', or \(``Typoluxe Meta-Baskerville\(''.
.sp .5v
\fBCopyright\fR. Copyright of typefaces can be divided into two parts:
copyright of the design itself; and copyright of the font in which the
design is implemented. In the U.S., typeface designs are currently not
covered by copyright. This is a result of reluctance by the copyright
office to deal with a complex field; by lobbying against copyright by
certain manufacturers whose profits were based on typeface
plagiarism; and by a reluctance of congress to deal with the complex issue in
the recent revision of the copyright law.
.P
The reluctance of Americans to press for typeface copyright may have been
influenced by a feeling that typeface plagiarism was good for U.S.
high-tech businesses who were inventing new technologies for printing, and
plagiarizing types of foreign origin (Europe and England). If the situation
becomes reversed, and foreign competition (from Japan, Taiwan, and Korea)
threatens to overcome American technological superiority in the laser printer
industry, then American firms may do an about-face and seek the protection of
typeface copyright to help protect the domestic printer industry. Such a
trend may already be seen in the licensing of typeface trademarks by
Adobe, Hewlett Packard, IBM, Imagen, and Xerox in the U.S. laser printer
industry.
.P
In Germany, where typeface design has always been a significant part of
the cultural heritage, and where typefounding has remained an important
business, there are more than one kind of copyright-like protections for
typefaces. Certain long-standing industrial design protection laws have
been used to protect typeface designs in litigation over royalties and
plagiarisms. Further, there is a recent law, the so-called
\(``Schriftzeichengesetz\('' enacted in 1981, that
specifically protects typeface designs. New designs are registered, as
is done with copyright in most countries. This law only protects new,
original designs. It is available to non-German designers and firms.
Therefore, some type firms and designers routinely copyright new designs
in West Germany. This gives a degree of protection for products marketed
in Germany. Since multinational corporations may find it cheaper to
license a design for world-wide use rather than deal with a special case
in one country, the German law does encourage licensing on a broader scale
than would initially seem to be the case.
.P
France, like Germany, has ratified an international treaty for protection
of typefaces. This 1973 Vienna treaty will become international law when
four nations ratify it. So far, only France and West Germany have done so,
and thus a design must be protected separately in each country. Even when
the treaty becomes law, it will take effect only in those countries that
have ratified it. The treaty was principally the work of the late Charles
Peignot, a French typefounder, and John Dreyfus, an English typographer
and typographic scholar. Presently, typefaces may be registered for
protection in France under a 19th century industrial design protection law.
.P
In the U.S., there continues to be some movement for typeface design
protection. A proposed bill that would protect the designs of useful
articles, like type, has been in committee for several years. It seems
to be going nowhere.
.P
Digital (as opposed to analog) fonts may be protected by
copyright of digital data and of computer programs. It has been
established that computer software is copyrightable. Therefore, software
that embodies a typeface, e.g. a digital font, is presumably also
protected. There is some objection to this kind of copyright, on the
grounds that the ultimate output of the program or the result of the data
(i.e. a typeface design) is not copyrightable. However, the current belief
expressed by the National Commission on New Technological Use of
Copyrighted Works is that software is copyrightable even if its function
is to produce ultimately a non-copyrightable work. Hence, typefaces produced
by Metafont or PostScript\*(rg, two computer languages which represent fonts
as programs, are presumably copyrightable. Typefaces represented as bit-map
data, run-length codes, spline outlines, and other digital data formats,
may also be copyrightable. Some firms do copyright
digital fonts as digital data.
.P
Note that the designs themselves are still not protected in the U.S. A
plagiarist could print out large sized letters (say, one per page) on an
Apple LaserWriter, using a copyrighted PostScript digital font, and then
redigitize those letters by using a scanner or a font digitizing program
and thus produce a new digital font without having copied the \fBprogram\fR or
\fBdigital data\fR, and thus without infringing the copyright on the font. The
quality of the imitation font would probably be awful, but it wouldn't
violate copyright. Of course, the plagiarist would need to rename
the font to evade trademark infringement. (As I write these
words, I have the guilty feeling that I have just provided a recipe for
type rip-off, but others have obviously thought of just such a scheme \(em
John Dvorak has even proposed something like it in one of his columns.)
.sp .5v
\fBDesign Patent\fR. The designs of typefaces may be patented in the U.S. under
existing design patent law. Many designs are patented, but type designers
generally don't like the patent process because it is slow, expensive, and
uncertain. Nevertheless, some type do get patented, and it is a form of
potential protection. Note that this is \fIDesign\fP Patent \(em the typeface
doesn't have to be a gizmo that does something, it merely has to be unlike
any previous typeface. The drawback here is that most attorneys and judges
are not aware that there are more than two or three typefaces: say,
handwriting, printing, and maybe blackletter. Therefore, litigating
against infringement is an educational as well as a legal process.
It is easy to see that typeface theft is more subtle than knocking over
a liquor store; it may not be illegal and the returns may be greater.
.P
Protections like design patent are available in many other countries, but
there is not an international standard (to my knowledge) so the situation
must be examined on a country by country basis.
.sp .5v
\fBInvention Patent\fR. Methods of rendering typefaces can be patented as
mechanical or electronic inventions. For example, the old hot-metal
Linotype machinery was protected by various patents, as was the IBM Selectric
typewriter and type ball. IBM
neglected to trademark the typeface names like Courier and Prestige, so
once the patents had elapsed, the names gradually fell into the public
domain without IBM doing anything about it (at the time, and for a dozen
years or so, IBM was distracted by a major
U.S. anti-trust suit). Most students of the type protection field believe
that those names are probably unprotectable by now, though IBM could still
presumably make a try for it if sufficiently motivated.
.P
There is currently a noteworthy development regarding a patent for
outline representation of digital type as arcs and vectors, with special
hardware for decoding into rasters. This patent (U.S. 4,029,947, June 14,
1977; reissue 30,679, July 14, 1981) is usually called the Evans & Caswell
patent, after its inventors. It was originally assigned to Rockwell, and
in 1982, Rockwell sued Allied Linotype for infringement. Allied settled
out of court, having paid an amount rumored to be in the millions.
Rockwell sold the patent, along with other typographic technology, to
Information Internation, Inc. (III) which then sued Compugraphic for
infringement. According to the Seybold Report, a respected typographic industry
journal, Compugraphic recently settled out of court for $5 million.
Although many experts believe the patent to be invalid because of several
prior inventions similar in concept, it nevertheless seems to be
a money-maker in corporate litigation. The Seybold Report has speculated on
which firms III would litigate against next. Among the candidates suggested by the
Seybolds was Apple for its LaserWriter, which uses outline fonts. Since
the entire laser printer industry and the typesetting industry is moving
toward outline font representation, Apple is certainly not alone. The
Seybolds further speculate on whether the difference between
character-by-character CRT typesetting and raster-scan laser typesetting
and printing would be legally significant in such as case. Ultimately,
some firm will hold out for a court judgement, and the matter will be decided.
.sp .5v
\fBTrade Secret\fR. Given that typeface designs have relatively little copyright
protection in the U.S., they are often handled as trade secrets. The
secret must apply to the digital data or programs only, because the images
themselves are ultimately revealed to the public as printed forms. It is
much more difficult to reconstruct the formula of Coca-Cola from its taste
than it is to reconstruct the design of Helvetica from its look on the
page. The exact bitmap or spline outline of a digital font is usually not
reconstructable from the printed image, although CRT screen fonts at usual
resolutions (60 - 120 dots per inch) may be reconstructed by patient
counting and mapping of bits off a screen display. Typeface
licenses often contain stipulations that the digital data will be encrypted and
confidential.
Just as a firm will protect the secret of a soft drink recipe, so a type
firm will protect the exact nature of its digital data.
.sp .5v
\fBEthics\fR. Some typographers are motivated by higher principles than greed,
profit, expediency, and personal interest. Idealists enthused with
concepts of ethical behavior and a vision of typography as a noble art may
find it distasteful to use plagiarized types. Some graphic
designers insist on using typefaces with bona-fide trademarks, both to
ensure that the type will be of high quality, and to encourage creativity
and ethics in the profession. A consequence of plagiarism that is
sometimes overlooked is a general erosion of ethics in an industry. If it
is okay to steal typeface designs, then it may be okay to purloin other kinds
of data, to falsify one's resume, to misrepresent a product, and so forth.
Most professional design
organizations attempt to promote ethical standards of professional
behavior, and personal standards may extend to avoidance of plagiarisms.
.P
The Association Typographique Internationale (ATypI) is an international
organization of type designers, type manufacturers, and letterform
educators. Its purpose is to promote ethical behavior in the industry,
advancement of typographic education, communication among designers, and
other lofty aims. Members of ATypI agree to abide by a moral code that
restricts plagiarism and other forms of depraved behavior (pertaining to
typography). These are noble goals, but some members (especially
corporate members) of ATypI, confronted with the pressures and
opportunities of commercial reality, nevertheless plagiarize typefaces of
fellow members, the moral code notwithstanding. Since ATypI is a voluntary
organization, there is very little that can be done about most such
plagiarism. Some years back, a world-famous type designer resigned
from the ATypI Board of Directors in protest over the organization's
flaccid attitude toward the plagiarists among its ranks. He has since agreed
to sit on the board again, but criticism of the organization's inability
to prevent type rip-offs by its own members, not to mention by
non-members, continues to be heard. Moderates in ATypI believe that a
few morals are better than none. It is not clear whether their
philosophical stance derives from Plato, Hobbes, or Rousseau.
.P
Given the general attitude of the public toward copyrighted video and software,
it is doubtful that ethical considerations will hinder most end-users'
attitude to plagiarized type fonts. A desire to have the fashionable
\(``label\('' or trademark may be a greater motivation toward the use of
bona-fide fonts than an ethical consideration.
.H 1 "Further Reading"
\(``The State of the Art in Typeface Design Protection\('', Edward Gottschall,
\fIVisible Language\fP, Vol. XIX, No. 1, 1985. (A special issue on
\(``The Computer and the Hand in Type Design\('' \(em proceedings of
a conference held at Stanford University in August, 1983).
.sp .5
\fIDer Schutz Typographischer Schriftzeichen\fP, by Guenter Kelbel.
Carl Heymans Verlag KG, Cologne, 1984. (A learned account in juridical
German prose, of the significance of the Vienna Treaty of 1973 and the
West German Schriftzeichengesetz of 1981).
.H 1 "Disclaimer"
These notes were originally prepared at the request of Brian Reid for
informal distribution. They are based on the author's review of available
literature on
the subject of typeface protection, and on personal experience in
registering types for trademark, copyright, and patent. However, they are
not legal advice. If one is contemplating protecting or plagiarizing a
typeface, and seeks legal opinion, it is advisable to consult an attorney.
The term \(``plagiarize\('' and words derived from it
are used here in its dictionary
sense of \(``to take and use as one's own the ideas of another\('' and does not
mean that the practice of typeface plagiarism is illegal;
that is determined by the laws of a particular country.
.sp .5
.ft I
Charles Bigelow is a professor of digital typography at Stanford
University and a
professional designer of original digital typefaces for electronic
printers and computer workstations. Mr. Bigelow and his partner
Kris Holmes designed the Lucida typeface family which is now
widely used on various laser printers.warren@pluto.UUCP (03/31/87)
Does anyone provide legal access to fonts for laser printers and such, e.g. is there somewhere that I could go to buy a Times Roman (TM) font from the owners of the name? Another point. I picked up the first printed item I found, it says "(C) 1986 Citbank NA". Full of words, but have they also (C)'d the type? If not, and the type is owned by someone else, why doesn't it say so? So can I lift fonts from there? -- warren /|/~\~~\ Why doesn't life come with subtitles? |__/__/_/ | seismo!philabs!tg!pluto!warren /
patwood@unirot.UUCP (04/04/87)
> Does anyone provide legal access to fonts for laser printers and such, > e.g. is there somewhere that I could go to buy a Times Roman (TM) font > from the owners of the name? You can either buy the font from the owner (in the case of Times Roman, that would be Allied Linotype); this is typically done by licensing the font for use on your device. You can also go to someone that is licensed to provide the font under an agreement with the trademark holder (e.g., Adobe "licenses" Times Roman to you when you buy a PostScript device). > Another point. I picked up the first printed item I found, it says > "(C) 1986 Citbank NA". Full of words, but have they also (C)'d the > type? If not, and the type is owned by someone else, why doesn't it > say so? So can I lift fonts from there? Type can't be copyrighted! Read the article by Charles Bigelow that I posted here a while ago. You can copyright the digital representation of a typeface (e.g., the bitmap or the PostScript code that produces it), as these are considered programs and data; however, once the type hits the page, it can't be copyrighted and therefore doesn't fall under the domain of the "(C) 1986 ..." In other words, you can lift fonts from any printed page, you simply can't call them by their trademarks. Pat Wood Editor, The PostScript Language Journal
rayan@ai.toronto.edu (04/08/87)
In article <483@unirot.UUCP> patwood@unirot.UUCP (Patrick Wood) writes:
# You can either buy the font from the owner (in the case of Times Roman,
# that would be Allied Linotype); this is typically done by licensing the
# font for use on your device. You can also go to someone that is licensed
# to provide the font under an agreement with the trademark holder (e.g.,
# Adobe "licenses" Times Roman to you when you buy a PostScript device).
Suppose you don't want to licence the font for a particular device, but
for a site; i.e. present and future devices of known and unforeseeable kinds?
One can license fonts for a particular device, but I wouldn't recommend it.
Devices are volatile objects. I would like to license the bitmaps, or the
font description, put the stuff on disk, and (be able to) use it on all our
devices.
Will they do that? Oh Nooo... and therefore, they lose our money, and my
respect. Growl.
rayan
--
Rayan Zachariassen
AI group, University of Torontoroot@scirtp.UUCP (04/08/87)
> Type can't be copyrighted! Read the article by Charles Bigelow that I > posted here a while ago. You can copyright the digital representation > of a typeface (e.g., the bitmap or the PostScript code that produces it), > as these are considered programs and data; however, once the type hits > the page, it can't be copyrighted and therefore doesn't fall under the > domain of the "(C) 1986 ..." In other words, you can lift fonts from > any printed page, you simply can't call them by their trademarks. > > Pat Wood > Editor, The PostScript Language Journal Two recent articles in THE TYPOGRAPHER, published by the Typographers International Association, discussed some developments in type copy- rights. In the Jan/Feb issue, there was a report of the US Copyright Office's request for comment on the "copyrightability of digitized type data." This is distinct from the issue of analog typeface design copyrights. Two sidebars contain pro (from Bitstream) and con (from Compaq) statements. Unfortunately, the article did not state the closing date for comments. The Mar/Apr issue reported on legislative efforts (H.R. 1179 and S. 791). These bills, if passed, will "give protection to 'useful articles.'" Typefaces were specifically included in the Senate version. The bills do not propose retroactive protection, so the potential effects on the issue of analog typeface design copyrights are not clear now. You could contact your Congressperson for more info.