On Thu, Nov 20, 2003 at 03:56:47PM +0000, Henning Makholm wrote: > Scripsit Kenshi Muto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > >> If there are more-clearly-free alternative fonts in Debian that > >> provide the same glyphs, then I won't oppose removing them. But if > >> removal would entail actual hardship for > > > "same glyph" of Watanabe-font causes a trouble. It means copy without > > original author's permission. > > Huh? Does that means that Hitachi asserts a copyright on the very > words "their" font is used to write down, or what?
HITACHI font is bitmap fonts. Since it is 32 dots fonts which can hold some aestetic feature of characters, it has uniq shape as a set of characters. Some WATANABE fonts (vector) used HITACHI font derivative as its base. (Someone copied font file used by HITACHI wordprocessor and distributed without HITACHI's permission) Can font data set can be protected is one question but that right extends to vectorization is another big question. As I see, HITACHI sees that way. I disagree here. I do not know they had shrinkwrap contract for old wordprocessor either. > > One of "More-clearly-free alternative scalable Japanese fonts" is > > kochi-mincho/kochi-gothic in sid/sarge. Many Japanese use this > > font rather than Watanabe font. > > If this alternative contains the necessary glyphs, then I do not see > that much of a problem with removing the Hitachi fonts. Exactly. We just has to make sure HITACHI's claim was not the primary reason to do so. HITACHI is just a noise.
