>Just to make things clearer: What is it that "we" are afraid of here; is it
>the lincense for FreeType held by its developers, or some general patents
>(presumably related to TT) that we might infringe on? In the first case, why
>not just ask the FT developers what they think about what we want to do? In
>the second case, why might this harm us if the FreeType stuff is already
>allowed to be out there? Is there anything I'm missing here? Forgive us
>international subscribers, our only education in the US legal system comes
>from "LA Law". (And software patent suits aren't sexy enough to get onto
>Ally McBeal.)

Well, a person directly infringes a patent by "making, using, 
offering for sale or selling" something practicing a claimed 
invention in the patent.  You can also indirectly infringe a patent 
by inducing another to infringe or by contributing to an infringement 
of another.  (All these are seriously glossed-over legal terms of art 
that don't apply in every case and may apply in cases you wouldn't 
think they would apply -- but they give the "gist" of the idea for 
informal purposes).

Thus, even if you or I didn't "make," mere "use" is enough to nab you 
for infringement.  If we integrated the thing into Squeak, we can in 
theory compromise the entire project for everyone, whether they be 
"maker" or "user."

And as to non-US venues, there may be foreign counterparts to the US 
patents.  If so, the patent coverage would be extraterritorial in 
those nations as well.  The scope of patent coverage (the "make, use, 
sell, induce, contribute" stuff) is simliar or the same in many, but 
not all, countries).

Not legal advice, etc.