On 6/17/14 10:10 AM, "Justin Mclean" <jus...@classsoftware.com> wrote:
>Hi, > >> AFAICT, it is the Google font, not the Adobe Font. >Sorry I don't know and hard to tell where it come from as there no other >info in that directory. May be in the fonts metadata I guess? IMO All the >more reason for stating it somewhere. The Google copyright is in the TTF file. Is that sufficient for you to accept that these are Google fonts? > >> Specifically, what changes do you propose to the release package? >Just add somthing like: >The Open Sans fonts in <dir> are licensed under the Apache 2.0 license and >copyright XXXX Google. See <google URL> for more info. Add that to what file according to what quote from the LICENSE and NOTICE document? > >I guess an alternative would be putting some license text in that font >directory but that sort of hides it. > >> What part of the AL says that a copyright must be included/acknowledged > >Redistribution section 4 part c > > (c) You must retain, in the Source form of any Derivative Works > that You distribute, all copyright, patent, trademark, and > attribution notices from the Source form of the Work, > excluding those notices that do not pertain to any part of > the Derivative Works; and I think this isn't a Derivative Work. IMO, that passage refers to headers when you change someone's source code or base code off of someone's code. > >The AL only refers to NOTICE file and not the LICENSE file. Remember >reading there's some reason for that but would need to search for it. Are you referring to their desire to not have a long list of copyrights in the headers of every file and/or to only claim copyright on the collective work? Either way, I don't think it is relevant here. Thanks, -Alex
