>That's great, actually.  Where did we get the initial images printed 
>to paper?  Were they also from the original fonts?  That gets you 
>back to the origin, and once again, we are relying on the 
>noncopyrightability of fonts and bitmap fonts.  While I don't 
>dispute that this is probably just fine under current law, my 
>understanding was that some felt it was imperative that we evade 
>forever the apple font heritage.  I didn't share this view, but some 
>did.

Ah well the images came from using the text tool to type into a 
macintosh paint program fixing those bits into a canvas of bits, then 
enlarged, and printed the canvas, but as we know it's a clone of an 
noncopyrightability bitmap font.

>
>This is the reason I asked this question in the first place.  Let me 
>put it plain one more time:
>
>	1) Does anyone in our forum still feel it is essential to 
>remove the Apple fonts from the image?; and if there are still those 
>who do,
>	2) Were the Accu fonts derived from and with permission of 
>Arts Mangement Systems, as owners of these fonts, or from Apple?
>
>Paul F., in particular, seemed to feel that the ownership needed to 
>be entirely clear of an Apple font heritage.  Has he changed his 
>views in this regard?

Re point 2) The fonts in the stable squeak image are derived from the 
Accufonts windows font files, which is only my understanding of what 
took place, based on the permission/license spoke to in my previous 
note, but the people who negotiated the agreement will need to 
confirm that.
-- 
--
===========================================================================
John M. McIntosh <johnmci at smalltalkconsulting.com> 1-800-477-2659
Corporate Smalltalk Consulting Ltd.  http://www.smalltalkconsulting.com
===========================================================================