Freetype2
Andrew C. Greenberg
werdna at mucow.com
Mon Sep 4 16:58:27 UTC 2000
>We need serifed fonts as good as Palatino, and we need sans serif
>fonts as good as Helvetica. I would definitely like the definitive
>word on the use of bitmap fonts. My supposition from various
>conversations is that bitmap fonts can't be copywrited and should be
>universally usable if they have non-copywritten names. This is the
>first task that has to be done.
Fonts, qua fonts, are not copyrightable at all. Eltra Corp. v.
Ringer, 579 F.2d 294, 298 (4th Cir. 1978). New, ornamental and
unobvious patterns can be the subject of design patents. Names of
fonts, to the extent they are short phrases, are not copyrightable,
but, to the extent not generic, may be subject to trademark
protection. However, as with most things legal, things get pretty
tricky when you try to apply these basic principles to things like
"font files," and more recently, "font programs," whatever they are.
In its 1988 "Policy Decision on the Copyrightability of Digitized
Typefaces," 53 Fed. Reg. 38110-38113 (September 29, 1998), the
Copyright Office determined that digitized typefaces were not
copyrightable, because they were not computer programs and required
little selection or arrangement beyond that dictated by the
uncopyrightable typeface design. However, in its 1992 final
regulation on "Registrability of Computer Programs that Generate
Typefaces," 57 Fed. Reg. 35 at 6201-02 (February 12, 1992), the
Copyright Office concluded that "computer programs designed for
generating typeface in conjunction with low resolution and other
printing devices may involve original computer instructions entitled
to protection under the Copyright Act."
Bitmaps, depending how they were constructed (for example, by
digitizing a print version of a font), are probably mere digitized
typefaces and not "font programs," and TTF files (including hints)
probably are, but hey, what do I know? I am unaware whether the
courts have addressed the obvious question, for example, of whether
one can produce a bitmap derived from, say, the Adobe fonts, and use
it with impunity.
I found a Ronald Whyte opinion in Adobe v. Southern Software to
contain a useful survey of the law, with some references:
http://www.bna.com/e-law/cases/adobe.html
--
Andrew C. Greenberg acg at netwolves.com
V.P. Eng., R&D, 813.885.2779 (office)
NetWolves Corporation 813.885.2380 (facsimile)
www.netwolves.com
Please use werdna at mucow.com instead of werdna at gate.net
More information about the Squeak-dev
mailing list
|