Comic Fonts again...
Ned Konz
ned at bike-nomad.com
Thu Apr 15 05:43:44 UTC 2004
On Wednesday 14 April 2004 10:26 pm, Doug Way wrote:
> Probably true about the trademark. I wonder if that means it's okay to
> give them a different name, if the bitmap fonts themselves are not
> copyrightable?
In most countries other than the US, fonts *are* copyrightable.
> To summarize, we had two (bitmap) comic StrikeFonts, called ComicPlain
> and ComicBold... these were removed. Then we also had the antialiased
> TrueType font called ComicSansMS, which is still in the image.
>
> EToys formerly used the ComicPlain/ComicBold StrikeFonts, until they
> were removed. We could either add some comic-ish StrikeFonts back in
> for EToys, or have them use a comic-ish TrueType font. I'd guess
> either would be fine... a TTFont might be okay as long as the font
> sizes used aren't too small. (starts to get a bit fuzzy)
> > Sounds like we're not following their rules here.
>
> Yeah, it looks like we're definitely violatin>
> - Dougg the third bullet
> point... we should probably remove ComicSansMS.
Andreas' comment about the "installable embedding" flag could be relevant
here, though (if we view them as being embedded rather than distributed
separately, which they're not).
> Perhaps we should look at one of the free comicsans replacements that
> John Pfersich just mentioned. Or maybe just bring back the bitmap
> comic fonts with a different name (if that's legit).
I don't know. Any IP attorneys out there want to take a swing at this?
--
Ned Konz
http://bike-nomad.com
GPG key ID: BEEA7EFE
More information about the Squeak-dev
mailing list
|