pusateri@x102a.harris-atd.com (Thomas J. Pusateri) (03/21/89)
Is anyone aware of some anonymous ftp sites that contain downloadable fonts for an HP LJ? Also what program (from an msdos machine) would I use to download them? Thanks for any info! Tom Pusateri The opinions mentioned above are not necessarily those of my employer. ______________________________________________________________________ Thomas Pusateri | INTERNET: pusateri@x102a.harris-atd.com Harris Corporation - GASD | UUCP: uunet!x102a!pusateri
taylor@hplabsz.HP.COM (Dave Taylor) (03/22/89)
Thomas J. Pusateri asks about downloadable LaserJet fonts and such in a recent article, and also asks about how to download them.... A good solution to the problem of downloading fonts on-the-fly from your PC to your LaserJet would be to use a package similar to the BackLoader program from Roxxolid Corp. This package allows users to download fonts into the printer in background while doing other things on their computer. [ Contact information: Roxxolid Corporation, 3345 Vincent Road, Pleasant Hill, CA, 94523-4318, (415) 256-0105 ] An interesting alternative for you to perhaps consider is to have a PostScript interpreter running on your computer, and to have that able to utilize so-called outline font technology to give you higher quality output (plus output from programs like Ventura Publisher too!) and the additional power of the PostScript language (e.g. font scaling, rotating, etc). There are two main programs available that support the HP printer family in this regard; GoScript from LaserGo Inc., and a package called "Freedom of Press", which I have no further information on. It's off the beaten track for what you're talking about, but might be worth investigating further] [ Contact information: LaserGo, Inc., 9235 Trade Place, Suite A, San Diego, CA 92126 (619) 530-2400 ] As far as the fonts themselves, if you have a LaserJet you should know that not only does HP supply a raft of fonts, but that you can get HP endorsed fonts from Bitstream Corporation too. In addition Elfring, SWFTE, Conographics, and other firms offer fonts for the LaserJet series. I recommend that you contact your local HP authorized PC dealer to find out more about formal channels for obtaining fonts. I hope this helps. -- Dave Taylor Intuitive Systems Los Altos, California Guest of HP Laboratories: taylor@hplabs.hp.com
mcdonald@uxe.cso.uiuc.edu (03/23/89)
Another possibility would be to find someone who has a set of downloadable fonts, either from HP, from Bitstream (e.g. the ones I got free with WordPerfect) or from a cloner. Make a copy of them on floppies. Use debug to edit out the copyright, and change the name of the font to something else. Then take them home and use them. Give them to your friends. The BIT PATTERNS of the fonts cannot be copyrighted or patented or protected in any other way (unless of course you buy them after signing some sort of paper saying you agree to give away your rights!). The names can be and are protected. And, most important, call you congressman to make sure it stays this way!
jra@jc3b21.UUCP (Jay R. Ashworth) (03/25/89)
In article <229800002@uxe.cso.uiuc.edu>, mcdonald@uxe.cso.uiuc.edu writes: > > Another possibility would be to find someone who has a set of downloadable > fonts, either from HP, from Bitstream (e.g. the ones I got free with > WordPerfect) or from a cloner. Make a copy of them on floppies. > Use debug to edit out the copyright, and change the name of the font > to something else. Then take them home and use them. Give them to your > friends. The BIT PATTERNS of the fonts cannot be copyrighted > or patented or protected in any other way (unless of course you > buy them after signing some sort of paper saying you agree to give > away your rights!). The names can be and are protected. > > And, most important, call you congressman to make sure it stays > this way! Uh, not exactly... The shapes of the individual glyphs (neat word, huh?) in a typeface can not be legally protected, but PostScript __Programs__ to draw those characters very _definitely_ can--those who think otherwise might hear from Adobe's legal dept... As for bit map font files, well, INAL, but I think that those are very probably covered by copyright, too. I certainly wouldn't want to find out the hard way... Cheers, -- jra
Classic_-_Concepts@cup.portal.com (03/27/89)
mcdonald@uxe.cso.uiuc.edu writes: > Another possibility would be to find someone who has a set of downloadable > fonts, either from HP, from Bitstream (e.g. the ones I got free with > WordPerfect) or from a cloner. Make a copy of them on floppies. > Use debug to edit out the copyright, and change the name of the font > to something else. Then take them home and use them. Give them to your > friends. The BIT PATTERNS of the fonts cannot be copyrighted > or patented or protected in any other way (unless of course you > buy them after signing some sort of paper saying you agree to give > away your rights!). The names can be and are protected. I have the longest fuse of just about anyone I know, yet in 9 years online, I cannot remember when a message provoked me to so much anger. The above message is obscene and callous. Do you realize how long it takes an artist to design a bitmap font? About 3-20 hours depending on size and complexity. Do you realize how long it takes to design a vector font? About 50-300 hours, again depending on size and complexity. And I'm not talking about quick and dirty fonts, I'm referring to polished, finished, tested and debugged products that look good on the screen and on paper and include alternate characters. Do you realize how much artists earn? Only 1 in 2000 artists with a masters degree gets work in his or her field. You'll find a huge number behind the counters in art supply stores, fast food outlets, restaurants, etc. working for low or minimum wages. You get the picture. Is it OK to rip off source code, paintings, photographs, books?? You're taking food out of real people's mouths. > And, most important, call you congressman to make sure it stays > this way! I have a counter suggestion. Call your congress representative and suggest that font artists have as much right to protection for fonts as everyone else has for intellectual and artistic property. Why the h*#l should they be exploited in the way you suggest? I think you should rethink your views. Or try earn a living for a while as a font designer. I'm a font designer. You'll have trouble supporting yourself, much less a family on those kind of wages. Your attitute is what one would expect from a naive youngster still living at home. It's time to grow up. \_ )\_ _/ `/)\_ __ // __ _____________________________________________ `\\)\_ / '~// /// Julie Petersen (LadyHawke@cup.portal.com `\\//\\/|'//' /// Classic_-_Concepts@cup.portal.com) (\/Yyyy/' __ /// "TimeLords aren't supposed to interfere." /Yyyy/' \\\ /// "This one calls himself 'Doctor' and interferes //\\ LadyHawke \\/// all the time." _______________________________ ///\\\
mcdonald@uxe.cso.uiuc.edu (03/28/89)
>Uh, not exactly... The shapes of the individual glyphs (neat word, >huh?) in a typeface can not be legally protected, but PostScript >__Programs__ to draw those characters very _definitely_ can--those who >think otherwise might hear from Adobe's legal dept... >As for bit map font files, well, INAL, but I think that those are very >probably covered by copyright, too. I certainly wouldn't want to find >out the hard way... My original suggestion did not include Postscript programs , which are indeed programs like any other. Nor do I know about entire bitmap font FILES. Those would include the most certainly protected name and mabye, or maybe not, protectable downloading info. What I was suggesting was, for example, taking the glyphs of a font and making, for example, an equivalent TeX .pxl file. Those I can download to my printer and use. Or convert into a downloading file I generate myself. At least this is how it was explained to me.
eager@ringworld.Sun.COM (Mike Eager) (03/29/89)
In article <229800002@uxe.cso.uiuc.edu> mcdonald@uxe.cso.uiuc.edu writes: > >Make a copy of them on floppies. >Use debug to edit out the copyright, and change the name of the font >to something else. You might get the idea that editing out the copyright statement constitutes a violation of copyright. >The BIT PATTERNS of the fonts cannot be copyrighted >or patented or protected in any other way. The BIT PATTERNS, can and (since you saw the notice) are protected by copyright. Copying the diskettes, and removing the notice, are a violation of copyright. The actual shape of the character cannot be protected by copyright. This allows you, if you wish, to digitize the printed version of the letter and create your own bit mapped or PostScript font. Then, you can copyright the bit map or PS program that you created.
bschwart@elbereth.rutgers.edu (Barry Schwartz) (03/29/89)
> The actual shape of the character cannot be protected by copyright. This allows > you, if you wish, to digitize the printed version of the letter and create your > own bit mapped or PostScript font. Then, you can copyright the bit map or > PS program that you created. Suppose someone writes a program that converts one bitmap format to another, then runs a protected font through it. Furthermore suppose (to muddy things up a little more) that the conversion involves some kind of frequency conversion scheme; that is, the pixels in the output do not correspond one-to-one with the pixels in the input. Perhaps after automatic conversion the font will need hand editing, perhaps not. Aside from ethical issues, what are the legal issues? You say I can digitize the printed version, but can I do what I have hypothesized above? And aside from law, but rather at the level of reality, is there an important difference between the techniques? Suppose I write a program that prints a copyrighted bitmap vastly blown up, then digitize from that hard copy. I don't even need fancy equipment--I can look at the thing and tell what each bit should be. Then I just type my data in. What makes one thing different from another? Some techniques are much easier to use than others, but I never thought of the difference between stealing and just plain using as a matter of how easy it was to do. Just butting into the conversation. I don't have any answers. I do love fonts, and I can see the need for protection of rights, as well as the need for public domain fonts. The two are in competition--but that doesn't mean one or the other shouldn't exist. What the form of protective rights should be is another matter--is a font (or a computer program) really in the same class as a novel or such? And then there is the matter of what obligations the copyright holder should have-- ethically if not legally. I don't know. I'm just butting in.
eager@ringworld.Sun.COM (Mike Eager) (03/30/89)
In article <Mar.29.00.36.43.1989.4633@elbereth.rutgers.edu> bschwart@elbereth.rutgers.edu (Barry Schwartz) writes: >> The actual shape of the character cannot be protected by copyright. This allows >> you, if you wish, to digitize the printed version of the letter and create your >> own bit mapped or PostScript font. Then, you can copyright the bit map or >> PS program that you created. > > >Suppose someone writes a program that converts one bitmap format >to another, then runs a protected font through it. Furthermore >suppose (to muddy things up a little more) that the conversion >involves some kind of frequency conversion scheme; that is, the >pixels in the output do not correspond one-to-one with the pixels >in the input. Perhaps after automatic conversion the font will >need hand editing, perhaps not. > >Aside from ethical issues, what are the legal issues? You say >I can digitize the printed version, but can I do what I have >hypothesized above? > The way I understand things, what you are describing is a violation of copyright if the bitmap is protected by copyright. Copying the bitmap is not the same as creating a new bitmap for a font from the shape of the letter. This is the same as the story that the map is not the territory: you cannot copyright where one street is in relation to another, but you can copyright the map describing the relationship. When someone copies the map, even if there is some format conversion (e.g., color to black & white, or reduction) that is copyright violation. It is not the same as creating a new map.
greid@adobe.com (Glenn Reid) (03/31/89)
In article <Mar.29.00.36.43.1989.4633@elbereth.rutgers.edu> bschwart@elbereth.rutgers.edu (Barry Schwartz) writes: >Suppose someone writes a program that converts one bitmap format >to another, then runs a protected font through it. Furthermore >suppose (to muddy things up a little more) that the conversion >involves some kind of frequency conversion scheme; that is, the >pixels in the output do not correspond one-to-one with the pixels >in the input. Perhaps after automatic conversion the font will >need hand editing, perhaps not. Suppose someone write a program that converts a program in one format (C source code) into another format (binary executable), then runs a protected program through it. Can you use the executable freely? No. Just because you write your own compiler does not give you the right to use somebody else's copyrighted source code. If you derive something directly from someone else's copyrighted work, it's a violation (as far as I know). If you use a font program to print a character, the toner on paper is no longer copyrighted, just the program that got it there. You can derive work from the toner on paper if you like, but not from the program. Just opinions, and the usual "I am not a lawyer" disclaimer applies.
richard@gryphon.COM (Richard Sexton) (03/31/89)
In article <96281@sun.Eng.Sun.COM> eager@sun.UUCP (Mike Eager) writes: >In article <229800002@uxe.cso.uiuc.edu> mcdonald@uxe.cso.uiuc.edu writes: >> >>Make a copy of them on floppies. >>Use debug to edit out the copyright, and change the name of the font >>to something else. > >You might get the idea that editing out the copyright statement constitutes >a violation of copyright. Not really. Copyright means ``right to copy''. Ie, Copying copyrighted material is illegal. Alterinf it isnt. Consider: you buy a copyrighted book. Can you copy it ? No. Can you alter it ? Yes. You'll notice there is a notice inside (at least ther probably is) that says you cant lend, lease or sell an altered version. >>The BIT PATTERNS of the fonts cannot be copyrighted >>or patented or protected in any other way. > >The BIT PATTERNS, can and (since you saw the notice) are protected by >copyright. Copying the diskettes, and removing the notice, are a violation >of copyright. This is a great point of contention right now. The copyright office has stated they will not support ANY copyrighting of fonts. What we have here is the wild wild west of fonts. > >The actual shape of the character cannot be protected by copyright. This allows >you, if you wish, to digitize the printed version of the letter and create your >own bit mapped or PostScript font. Then, you can copyright the bit map or >PS program that you created. Of course if what you end up with is binary identical to the original it kinda complicates matters, huh ? -- Keep out of the reach of children richard@gryphon.COM decwrl!gryphon!richard gryphon!richard@elroy.jpl.NASA.GOV
bschwart@elbereth.rutgers.edu (Barry Schwartz) (03/31/89)
> This is the same as the story that the map is not the territory: you cannot copyright > where one street is in relation to another, but you can copyright the map > describing the relationship. When someone copies the map, even if there is some > format conversion (e.g., color to black & white, or reduction) that is copyright > violation. It is not the same as creating a new map. I imagine you are correct. I am NOT saying I disagree with these laws (and I am NOT saying I agree with them, either). But I think it is important to realize that the distinctions being made are arbitrary. Someone is saying, "I have to draw the line somewhere, so I am going to use *this* criterion." Consider: the font artist will be just as injured if I copy from the printed version as if I copy from the floppy disk, with transformations. And the jury may have to go on someone's testimony that I was seen doing the dirty deed, because one may not be able to tell the difference otherwise. And what if I do some hand tailoring after the perhaps illicit copy? What then?
bschwart@elbereth.rutgers.edu (Barry Schwartz) (03/31/89)
> If you use a font program to print a character, the toner on paper is > no longer copyrighted, just the program that got it there. You can > derive work from the toner on paper if you like, but not from the > program. Repetition of disclaimer: I believe there is a need for protection, but do not accept (or reject) the current system just because it is there. That said, I think it is important to point out that in some sense the toner and the bitmaps are isomorphic, one-to-one (and onto, I know, I know). > Suppose someone write a program that converts a program in one format > (C source code) into another format (binary executable), then runs a > protected program through it. Can you use the executable freely? No. > Just because you write your own compiler does not give you the right to > use somebody else's copyrighted source code. Very interesting that you use this analogy. Suppose I run some font designer's bitmaps through a Hewlett-Packard LaserJet II bitmap-to-toner translator, then claim the output as my own. Can I do that?
wcs@skep2.ATT.COM (Bill.Stewart.[ho95c]) (04/02/89)
In article <14001@gryphon.COM> richard@gryphon.COM (Richard Sexton) writes: } This is a great point of contention right now. The copyright office } has stated they will not support ANY copyrighting of fonts. Out of curiosity, does anyone know if the Berne Convention (international copyright agreements whihc the US is joining with) covers copyrighting of fonts? -- # Bill Stewart, AT&T Bell Labs 2G218 Holmdel NJ 201-949-0705 ho95c.att.com!wcs # Washington, DC. Raining. Long, cold, heavy rain. Been raining for days. # I was here last year in the spring. It was raining like this then, too. echo This article public domain unless posted to an att.* group.
richard@gryphon.COM (Richard Sexton) (04/02/89)
In article <709@adobe.UUCP> greid@adobe.COM (Glenn Reid) writes: > >If you derive something directly from someone else's copyrighted work, >it's a violation (as far as I know). > >If you use a font program to print a character, the toner on paper is >no longer copyrighted, just the program that got it there. You can >derive work from the toner on paper if you like, but not from the >program. From a PostScript program, probably true. But since the Copyright office has claimed they wont uphold a copyright on a font in ANY form, this all becomes less and less clear. Personally I feel they are poking the font manyfacturors in the side to get Congress to pass a font copyright law. They as much said so when they said (and I paraphrase) ``We arnt going to uphold ANY font copyrights. Fonts are utilitarian in nature and lack distinct authorship. If you dont like it, get congress to pass a law''. >Just opinions, and the usual "I am not a lawyer" disclaimer applies. Me too. Now - ta da - a source of HP downloadable fonts, that is after all what the original poster requested so many weeks ago :-) Ok, there's this commercial network called ``American People Link'' or ``plink''. It's like Compuserve, but smaller and cheaper. In the amiga download section, there are a few megabytes of HP fonts. I have some phone numbers here - (800) 524-0100, and in Illinois (312) 670-2666. Now, the reason I know about this is Harv Laser a friend of mine and he's the moderator of the Amiga part of it. This is my only affiliation. If you want to mail harv, try hrlaser@gryphon.COM. -- ``I'm from New York. I hate everywhere else'' - anon richard@gryphon.COM decwrl!gryphon!richard gryphon!richard@elroy.jpl.NASA.GOV
andrews@cos.com (Andrew R. Scholnick) (04/04/89)
> In article <14001@gryphon.COM> richard@gryphon.COM (Richard Sexton) writes: > This is a great point of contention right now. The copyright office > has stated they will not support ANY copyrighting of fonts. Does anyone Know where I can Find documentation for this position (of a legal nature)? Thanks. ARS. -- - Andrew R. Scholnick @ Corp. for Open Systems, McLean, VA -- andrews@cos.com - {uunet, sundc, decuac}!cos!andrews -- Everything I write blame on me, NOT -- my employer. - "Adventure is when you toss your life on the scales of -- chance and wait for the pointer to stop." - M. Leinster (First Contact)
richard@gryphon.COM (Richard Sexton) (04/06/89)
In article <16608@cos.com> andrews@cos.com (Andrew R. Scholnick) writes: >> In article <14001@gryphon.COM> richard@gryphon.COM (Richard Sexton) writes: >> This is a great point of contention right now. The copyright office >> has stated they will not support ANY copyrighting of fonts. > >Does anyone Know where I can Find documentation for this position (of a >legal nature)? Sigh. The first time IO posted this information, sombody asked this and I dug up the original reference in MacWorld or some such magazine. That was then, this is now. I can't find it. But. I bet a good bet would be to call the copyright office. -- ``How do you like my new cordless phone ?'' ``What ?'' richard@gryphon.COM decwrl!gryphon!richard gryphon!richard@elroy.jpl.NASA.GOV