jeynes@adobe.COM (Ross A. Jeynes) (03/27/90)
It was suggested that I post the following file, since there was a lot
of confusion about the font copyright announcement when it happened.
---------
FONT PROGRAM COPYRIGHTING: QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS
Q: What exactly did Adobe copyright? What does this mean?
A: Adobe received a copyright registration for a PostScript typeface
program, which is the series of software commands that describes to the
PostScript interpreter the shapes of the individual characters making up a
typeface.
This means that registered typeface programs now have the same legal
protection under copyright laws as do other computer software programs, such
as word processors or spreadsheets.
Q: Since Adobe copyrighted the typeface program does this mean other
manufacturers can't make their own versions?
A: No. Adobe did not copyright the series of characters or the shapes of
the characters (the design of the typeface). Under current U.S. Copyright
Law, the typeface design itself is not a copyrightable work. Adobe
copyrighted its program that implements the typeface. Other manufacturers
are free to write their own programs that depict the same typeface, as long
as they don't infringe on Adobe's typeface program.
Q: Why is this announcement special? Hasn't it always been illegal to copy
software? How are typeface programs different?
A: Until this registration, the U.S. Copyright Office has refused to
register copyrights for digital typefaces. In its Policy Decision on
Copyrightability of Digitized Typefaces dated September 29, 1988, the
Copyright Office specifically ruled that digital typefaces were nothing more
than a copy of the underlying design, and represented no unique work of
authorship. Under that ruling, the status of typeface programs was unclear.
Q: Have other vendors tried and failed to register copyrights for their
typeface programs before?
A: Yes. A number of vendors, including Adobe, had previously tried to
register copyrights for typeface programs and had not succeeded.
Q: What happened to change that? What did Adobe do to get the typeface
program registered this time around?
A: Adobe demonstrated to the Copyright Office that PostScript typeface
software really is a computer program. Adobe used its ITC Souvenir typeface
program for this demonstration. Adobe was assisted by Bitstream, Inc.,
which, for demonstration purposes, provided portions of its software program
representing the same typeface. By presenting two independently developed
and quite different programs for the same typeface design, Adobe
demonstrated the fact that the programs were indeed creative works of
authorship covered by copyright law.
Q: Will Adobe, or other companies, have to go through the same process to
register additional typeface programs?
A: Basically yes, although the process from now on should be much more
routine. This registration has clarified that typeface programs are indeed
copyrightable. As long as vendors can demonstrate that their products are
computer programs, rather than uncopyrightable data, the process should be
straightforward.
Q: Does this protect downloadable typeface programs only? Does it extend to
font programs in ROM as well?
A: Copyright protection extends to any computer program regardless of media.
Font programs in ROM are covered.
Q: Isn't this a return to the old days when each typesetter vendor had
proprietary typefaces and you had to buy their hardware to get their font
library?
A: Not at all. Since the PostScript language is a broad-based standard
supported by dozens of manufacturers, including all the major typesetter
companies, one version of a PostScript font program will run on any printer,
typesetter or display device that supports Adobe's PostScript interpreter.
Currently, there are over 70 products in the marketplace that support the
PostScript language.
That same PostScript font program will also run on Adobe Type Manager
software. That adds several dozen more output devices to the list.
Q: Is this the same as design protection?
A: No, this is copyright protection for the programs that represents the
designs. Under U.S. Copyright Law, type designs themselves are not
copyrightable material.
Q: What is Adobe's position on design protection?
A: Adobe supports industry efforts to obtain industrial design protection
for original typeface designs. Granting protection to the designs would
provide the incentive for more designs to be created. We feel that this is
to the benefit of the user and to the industry as a whole.
Q: At the Seybold Conference Adobe announced it would release the
specifications for Type 1 PostScript language format, making it an "open"
standard. Now Adobe is copyrighting its font programs to make them closed
and proprietary. Aren't those two actions inconsistent?
A: No they're not. The Type 1 specification is the documentation that
describes the command structure used by the PostScript Type 1 font
interpreter, including the hints and the encryption. Anyone will be able to
use that specification to make Type 1 programs of their own. Using that
specification, they'll be able to write their own font programs and now
receive copyright registration for them as well.
However, as we announced at Seybold, we are not publishing our source code
or our own product implementations. It has been, and will continue to be,
our intent to protect the intellectual property rights of our software
programs.
Q: Does this impact the position of Adobe's Type 1 spec, or vendors'
abilities to use it to create font programs of their own?
A: Yes. It give others even more incentive to use the spec to create Type 1
font programs, because now they'll have legal protection available for the
intellectual property they create.
Q: Who stands to benefit from this?
A: The font vendor will benefit by having legal protection from software
pirates. Copyright protection provides financial incentive to produce more
typeface programs and to focus on providing the best quality possible.
Copyright protection encourages competition in the industry.
Increased competition, more typeface software, and better quality products
all mean that the end-user benefits the most.
Q: Which typeface program did you copyright first? Why?
A: Our first registration was for the ITC Garamond Light typeface program.
We chose this one first because it is a very popular typeface.
Q: Are all of Adobe's typefaces now copyrighted? When will that happen?
A: All of Adobe's typeface programs are protected under the U.S. Copyright
Law. Now that we've demonstrated that our products are indeed programs,
registering the rest will be routine. Although registration is not
necessary for copyright protection, we expect to have copyright registration
for the entire library soon.
Q: Does this mean that pirates have a "window of opportunity" to steal your
software with impunity? Do you have any protection from now until the
programs are registered?
A: Pirates will still be liable. Under copyright laws, any original work of
authorship is automatically copyrighted. Copyright registration, however,
is a necessary formality for litigation to proceed, and can happen after the
fact. Pirates are liable even if the act of infringement happened before
the registration took place.
Q: Did Adobe pursue this copyright with the goal in mind of suing specific
companies or people who have been copying your software? Do you know who
those people are?
A: Adobe pursued this route in the normal course of business in order to
protect a valuable asset.
Q: What are the financial implications for Adobe of copyrighting its font
programs? Does the copyright make them a more valuable asset?
A: We've always believed that our typeface programs were valuable assets.
Copyright registration offers us greater legal protection for that asset.
Q: Are industry associations in favor of copyright registration?
A: The industry associations that we are aware of, including Professional
PostScript Alliance and Typographers International Association, are strongly
in favor. They recognize that, in order for vendors to create products,
they need the ability to protect the fruits of their labors. Copyright
protection for font programs provides this protection in a way that fosters
competition. The associations view this as good for the user as well as for
the industry as a whole.
Q: As a user of typeface software, does this registration restrict my normal
use of the fonts in any way? Will this increase the prices I pay for
typeface software?
A: This registration will only impact the software pirates, people who make
copies of software rather than buy their own, or make and distribute
unauthorized copies of font programs that they buy, rather than develop
their own typeface programs. The typical user will not be affected.
Rather than increase prices for font programs, this will most likely lead to
lower prices over time. By giving manufacturers legitimate protection for
their creative efforts, copyright registration provides motivation for
production of more typeface programs, thereby increasing competition.
Q: Can a user customize Adobe typeface programs with programs such as
Letraset's Studio?
A: The Copyright Law only permits an owner of a copy of a computer program
to make or authorize the making of another copy or adaptation of that
computer program provided that the new copy or adaptation is created as an
essential step in the utilization of the computer program in conjunction
with a machine and that it is used in no other manner. Although the above
use would not be permitted under the Copyright Law, Adobe has stated that it
will permit sublicensees of Adobe typeface programs to modify the program(s)
for his or her own use. A sublicensee cannot, however, redistribute a
modified version of the Adobe typeface program.
Q: Is it a copyright infringement for a user to include an Adobe typeface in
an encapsulated PostScript (EPSF) file which is distributed electronically
as clip art?
A: An EPSF file contains the description of an image in several formats: a
PostScript language code description; a bitmap description; and, optionally,
other alternative descriptions. It is not a copyright infringement to
include a bitmap description of an Adobe typeface in the encapsulated
PostScript file. It is also not a copyright infringement to include a
routine which asks for one or more characters from a named typeface in the
PostScript language code description (e.g. /Helvetica findfont) so that the
EPSF file will search to see if the typeface program is available in the
raster device on which the EPSF file is being output. However, it would be
a copyright infringement to include all or any portion of an Adobe typeface
program itself in the EPSF file which is distributed electronically as clip
art.
Q: Is it a copyright infringement for a user of an Adobe typeface program to
use a program like Altsys' Metamorphosis to (a) convert the Adobe typeface
into a Type 3 typeface program or an EPSF file and (b) to import that file
into Adobe Illustrator 88, modify the typeface for use as a logo and use the
logo in a document?
A: Although the above use would not be permitted under the Copyright Law,
Adobe has stated that it will permit sublicensees of Adobe typeface programs
to use programs like Altsys' Metamorphosis to modify it for his or her own
use. However, it is a copyright infringement and a violation of Adobe's end
user license to use a program like Metamorphosis to produce and distribute a
different typeface design if the user modifies or copies the typeface
program in the process of creating the design.
Q: Is it a copyright infringement if the user of the Adobe typeface program
redistributes electronic copies of the file containing the above logo?
A: It would not be an infringement if the file contained a bitmapped
representation of the typeface or included a routine which asked for one or
more characters from a named typeface in the PostScript language code
description (e.g. /Helvetica findfont) so that the file will search to see
if the typeface program is available in the raster device on which the logo
is being output. However, it would be a copyright infringement to include
all or any portion of an Adobe typeface program itself in the electronic
file and to redistribute that file.
Q: Is it a copyright infringement if a user converts all of the characters
in an Adobe typeface program using a program like Metamorphosis and then
uses a program like Fontographer or Font Studio to produce a different
design?
A: Although the above use would not be permitted under the Copyright Law,
Adobe has stated that it will permit sublicensees of Adobe typeface programs
to use programs like Metamorphosis, Fontographer and Font Studio to produce
a different design for his or her own use within the scope of his or her
license from Adobe (e.g. single printer or multiprinter use). However, it
is a copyright infringement and a breach of Adobe's end user license
agreement to use these programs to produce and distribute a different
typeface design if the user modifies or copies the typeface program in the
process of creating the design.
Q: Is it a copyright infringement for a user to convert an Adobe typeface
program to a Royal or Folio format?
A: Although the above use would not be permitted under the Copyright Law,
Adobe has stated that it will permit sublicensees of Adobe Typeface programs
to convert it to a Royal or Folio format.
Q: Is it a copyright infringement if a user of the Adobe typeface program
converts the program to a Royal or Folio format and redistributes copies of
the resulting Royal or Folio format font?
A: Yes.
Q: Is it an infringement for a third party to create a Type 1 typeface
program for a typeface for which Adobe has already created a Type 1 typeface
program?
A: No. It is only an infringement if the third party copies Adobe's
typeface program in whole or in part. Independent development of a typeface
program for the same typeface is not precluded.
Q: How will Adobe monitor whether a third party typeface program infringes
Adobe's copyrights?
A: Adobe will monitor this in the same way it monitors infringement of any
of its other software programs: It will look for unauthorized copies of its
typeface programs as well as programs which are so similar to its typeface
programs that it appears they have been derived from the Adobe programs.
Q: Is it an infringement for a third party to create Type 1 font programs
and implement them on a PostScript language clone interpreter?
A: It is not an infringement if the Type 1 font programs and the PostScript
language clone interpreter are both independently developed and do not
infringe Adobe's copyrighted typeface programs and interpreter.
Q: How can a third party implement an interpreter that uses Type 1 font
programs without infringing on Adobe's copyrighted typeface programs and
interpreter?
A: The Copyright law does not preclude independent development. Although
Adobe has a copyright in its PostScript language, it has announced a policy
that everyone has a royalty-free license to use this language to create
PostScript language drivers, application programs which are compatible with
the PostScript language and even PostScript language interpreters. It is
not an infringement for a third party to use the PostScript Language
Reference Manual and the Type 1 specification to independently create
PostScript language interpreter and typeface programs. However, it would be
a copyright infringement for a third party to copy all or any portion of
Adobe's PostScript interpreter or typeface programs in the development of
such software.
-----------
Ross Jeynes
Developer Support jeynes@adobe.com
Adobe Systems Incorporated {sun|decwrl}!adobe!jeyneswoody@chinacat.Unicom.COM (Woody Baker @ Eagle Signal) (03/27/90)
Thanks Ross. Quite a dissertation. A couple of questions/thoughts. "Copyright infringment if a user of the Adoby typeface program converts the program to Royal or folio format and redistributes it" How would this be infringment. It seems that the entire program would have to be re-written in order to do this, and that would make it an original work? Secondly, what about coordinates? Given that there are a restricted set of controlpoints and data points to describe a font character, suppose that a font developer takes the coordinates for each of these, and represents them in say an array or some OTHER data structure that Adobe does not use. Then they create a procedure that draws the letter using the array. This code is completely diffrent from the Adobe font. The only similarity is the fact that the same coordinates are used, i.e. the same endpoints and control points. but they are rendered in a diffrent manner, and a diffrent order. The output would be absolutely identical, but the code would not. Is this infringement? What about altering the coordinates by say 3 points in the x direction and 4 points in the y direction, and then compensating for it using a translation. Is this an infringement. thirdly: This is beginning to sound like a broken record "Although the above use would not be permitted under Copyright law, Adobe has stated that it will permit sublicenes of Adobe typeface programs to "...... Who are the sublicencees? Cheers Woody
sjs@spectral.ctt.bellcore.com (Stan Switzer) (03/27/90)
In article <1117@chinacat.Unicom.COM> woody@chinacat.Unicom.COM (Woody Baker @ Eagle Signal) writes: > "Copyright infringement if a user of the Adobe typeface program converts > the program to Royal or folio format and redistributes it" > > How would this be infringement. It seems that the entire program would > have to be re-written in order to do this, and that would make it an original > work? It seems to me that Adobe is "pushing the envelope" here. What they've done is exactly analogous to copyrighting a recipe for chicken soup. The only thing that is protected is the particular wording of the recipe. Anyone who wants to word it differently can rewrite the recipe with the exact same ingredients. On the other hand, to copy the program literally and redistribute it would be a violation of copyright, and to convert the font to some other format for redistribution would be prohibited by the user's license agreement. Adobe's bases are already well covered. I don't understand why they want to make this copyright business seem more important than it really is. Stan Switzer sjs@bellcore.com
keil@apollo.HP.COM (Mark Keil) (03/28/90)
In article <21334@bellcore.bellcore.com> sjs@bellcore.com (Stan Switzer) writes: > > It seems to me that Adobe is "pushing the envelope" here. [<< agreed >>] (stuff deleted) > I don't understand why they want to make this copyright business seem more > important than it really is. Looks to me like spin control by the Adobe legal dept. Instead of letting thing develop willy - nilly, it seems like they are making a preemptive strike by attempting to define the playing feild. They clearly gave the answers the way they want to see things. Not that one would expect any different. We are talking $100's of millions at stake. Notice how definite the answers were. My feel for that law is that few things are real definite. There are many exceptions, and there are always new cases. And there is nothing like new technology to create new cases. This copyrighting of font programs is a "case" in point ;-) . It could be that the decision of the copyright office could be overturned. This is unlikely, but could still happen. Claimer: These be mine own opinions. Mark Keil Apollo Computer, Chelmsford MA 01824 +1 508-256-6600 x2495 keil@apollo.hp.com / {decvax,mit-erl,yale}!apollo!keil