AFAICT, it is the Google font, not the Adobe Font. If you have evidence to the contrary please supply that evidence, otherwise, let's proceed as if it is the Google font under AL.
Specifically, what changes do you propose to the release package? What part of the AL says that a copyright must be included/acknowledged in LICENSE or NOTICE? Especially when the LICENSE and NOTICE policy document seems to say that isn't necessary? All I see in: http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html#permissive-deps is: "Bundling an Apache-2.0-licensed DependencyAssuming once again that that the dependency subtree contains no bundled subcomponents under other licenses and thus the ALv2 applies uniformly to all files, there is no need to modify LICENSE. If the dependency supplies a NOTICE file, its contents must be analyzed and the relevant portions bubbled up into the top-level NOTICE file." Thanks, -Alex On 6/17/14 9:05 AM, "Justin Mclean" <jus...@classsoftware.com> wrote: >Please read terms of Apache license both license template and header >containing copyright must be included. > >If you bundled Apache made software no changes are required, but for other >copyright owners they need to be acknowledged. > >As the font can't have a header as such makes sense to put a couple of >lines in the LICENSE file stating the copyright owner. > >This is even assuming the font is Apache licensed. I suspect it may be the >Adobe OS font not the Google one and in that case more is probably >required >there.
