I've used a few fonts from this site. They've each been a mess; A dozen 
tiny curve segments and straight lines are used to form what could be a 
single cubic Bezier curve. This leads me to believe that these "free" 
fonts are algorithmically generated from pictures of un-free fonts.[1]

So, is it legal to use these fonts for semi-commercial designs? Is it 
legal for me to clean them up? I'm considering publishing a few of my 
private Zazzle shirt designs. Given the expected returns, paying for a 
commercial license for even a single font is out of the question.

  -Shay


[1] BTW, WTF? The algorithm can't do better than this? Or is this the 
output of some crappy fonting program?

Post a reply to this message

Shay wrote:
> So, is it legal to use these fonts for semi-commercial designs?

It depends on the country. I am not a lawyer.

That said, my understanding is that you can trademark a font name, and you 
can copyright the file the font is in, but you can't copyright the font 
itself. (I.e., a font is an "idea" while a TTF file is an expression of that 
idea.)

Now, whether the font you're looking at is a derivative work of a font file 
somewhere is another question.

-- 
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
    Eiffel - The language that lets you specify exactly
    that the code does what you think it does, even if
    it doesn't do what you wanted.

Post a reply to this message

On 6/11/2010 2:03 AM, Darren New wrote:
> That said, my understanding is that you can trademark a font name, and
> you can copyright the file the font is in, but you can't copyright the
> font itself. (I.e., a font is an "idea" while a TTF file is an
> expression of that idea.)

Why would their copyright be different than any other artistic work?

-- 
http://isometricland.com

Post a reply to this message

Le 11/06/2010 08:03, Darren New a écrit :
> Shay wrote:
>> So, is it legal to use these fonts for semi-commercial designs?
> 
> It depends on the country. I am not a lawyer.
> 
> That said, my understanding is that you can trademark a font name, and
> you can copyright the file the font is in, but you can't copyright the
> font itself. (I.e., a font is an "idea" while a TTF file is an
> expression of that idea.)

Argh... I believe you would be in trouble with any foundry (provider of
fonts): The appearance of the font is what is actually protected by the
law(s). If it looks the same (same letters design, same spacing...), it
might be judged an infringement.
The technical aspects are not really concerned: you could very well make
a set of wooden-block for a font and get sued for infringement if the
printed result is actually a protected font.
It's the judge (and the experts) which decide about the similarity and
the good faith.
That's why most newspapers used to have their very own fonts, designed
(and payed) for their usage.

-- 
A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.<br/>
Q: Why is it such a bad thing?<br/>
A: Top-posting.<br/>
Q: What is the most annoying thing on usenet and in e-mail?

Post a reply to this message

SharkD wrote:
> On 6/11/2010 2:03 AM, Darren New wrote:
>> That said, my understanding is that you can trademark a font name, and
>> you can copyright the file the font is in, but you can't copyright the
>> font itself. (I.e., a font is an "idea" while a TTF file is an
>> expression of that idea.)
> 
> Why would their copyright be different than any other artistic work?

Hey, I don't make the rules.

I don't think it is different. Maybe you could copyright each individual 
letter shape or something. But the font as a whole is designed to be used 
with rearranged characters, yes?  You can copyright a book, but not the 
individual words in a book, too.

-- 
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
    Eiffel - The language that lets you specify exactly
    that the code does what you think it does, even if
    it doesn't do what you wanted.

Post a reply to this message

Le_Forgeron wrote:
> Le 11/06/2010 08:03, Darren New a écrit :
>> Shay wrote:
>>> So, is it legal to use these fonts for semi-commercial designs?
>> It depends on the country. I am not a lawyer.
>>
>> That said, my understanding is that you can trademark a font name, and

>> you can copyright the file the font is in, but you can't copyright the

>> font itself. (I.e., a font is an "idea" while a TTF file is an
>> expression of that idea.)
> 
> Argh... I believe you would be in trouble with any foundry (provider of

> fonts): The appearance of the font is what is actually protected by the

> law(s). If it looks the same (same letters design, same spacing...), it

> might be judged an infringement.

Do you have a cite for this? Not that I don't believe you, but I'm just 
quoting what I was taught in a law class. Maybe the law changed since the
n, 
or I'm misremembering, or it's a different jurisdiction, so I'm intereste
d 
in the details.

And given your "a écrit" bit above, I expect you're talking about eu
ropean 
laws rather than US laws.

-- 
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
    Eiffel - The language that lets you specify exactly
    that the code does what you think it does, even if
    it doesn't do what you wanted.

Post a reply to this message

SharkD wrote:
> On 6/11/2010 2:03 AM, Darren New wrote:
>> That said, my understanding is that you can trademark a font name, and
>> you can copyright the file the font is in, but you can't copyright the
>> font itself. (I.e., a font is an "idea" while a TTF file is an
>> expression of that idea.)
> 
> Why would their copyright be different than any other artistic work?
> 

Dealing with USA law. Still not a lawyer, not legal advice, etc etc.

It isn't different, but there are only certain things that can be
copyrighted. The wording, prior to 1995, (§202.10(c), 37 C.F.R.):

“(c) If the sole intrinsic function of an article is its utility, the
fact that the article is unique and attractively shaped will not qualify
it as a work of art. However, if the shape of a utilitarian article
incorporates features, such as artistic sculpture, carving, or pictorial
representation, which can be identified separately and are capable of
existing independently as a work of art, such features will be eligible
for registration.”

That got changed in '95, you can read the current statute here
http://www.bitlaw.com/source/37cfr/202_10.html

The main problem with guessing how that change affects fonts is that a
major case hasn't been heard since the change took effect. Peter Pan
Fabrics, Inc. v. Martin Weiner Corp. was in the 60s, and the major case
Eltra Corp. v. Ringer was in the 70s. Eltra found that fonts did not
meet the requirement for 'artistic merit' and I think has been the
standing precedent.

Now, internationally copyrighted fonts are protected in the USA. Berne
Convention and all that.

Post a reply to this message

On 11/06/2010 11:29 PM, Sabrina Kilian wrote:
> Dealing with USA law. Still not a lawyer, not legal advice, etc etc.
>

Is that a legal disclaimer? ;-)

-- 

Best Regards,
	Stephen

Post a reply to this message

Stephen wrote:
> On 11/06/2010 11:29 PM, Sabrina Kilian wrote:
>> Dealing with USA law. Still not a lawyer, not legal advice, etc etc.
>>
> 
> Is that a legal disclaimer? ;-)
> 

No, I would have to be professional to offer one of those.

Post a reply to this message

On 12/06/2010 3:49 AM, Sabrina Kilian wrote:
> Stephen wrote:
>> On 11/06/2010 11:29 PM, Sabrina Kilian wrote:
>>> Dealing with USA law. Still not a lawyer, not legal advice, etc etc.
>>>
>>
>> Is that a legal disclaimer? ;-)
>>
>
> No, I would have to be professional to offer one of those.

:-D

-- 

Best Regards,
	Stephen

Post a reply to this message