Scripsit Branden Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> There is jurisprudential precedent on this issue, at least in the United
> States.[*]
> It has been ruled that typefaces are not copyrightable, but fonts are.
Interesting. I'd have though that the typeface was what carried the
copyright since that
On Mon, Feb 07, 2000 at 04:14:52PM +0100, Henning Makholm wrote:
> Well, I can't argue with that. But I'm happy for not being the
> judge who - in these days of digital typesetting - must decide
> when something is an alternative representation of a font and
> when it is just a document which happe
On Mon, Feb 07, 2000 at 02:09:27PM -0500, Raul Miller wrote:
> Anyways, I don't see anything that says that a person who owns a legal
> copy of a font would not be allowed to prepare text which displays
> that font.
I don't argue against that. I just have the distinct feeling that Fair
Use is not
On Mon, Feb 07, 2000 at 08:54:29PM +0200, Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho wrote:
> AFAIK, US fair use includes such things as scientific or journalistic
> citation or commentary, and making copies for one's education.
> For example, republishing a book is not fair use, and use of fonts often
> is republicat
On Mon, Feb 07, 2000 at 01:37:01PM +0100, Peter Makholm wrote:
> Fair Use has a different meanings in US and Europe, just like Free
> Speach.
I know. In Finland, there is no such thing as Fair Use. (Many of)
the privileges the Fair Use implicitly grants to people in the US and
elsewhere are expl
On Mon, Feb 07, 2000 at 04:17:41AM -0800, Joseph Carter wrote:
> You have a copy of the program.
> You want to tell me you now need special permission to run it?
Not necessarily. But my question was how Fair Use comes into play,
not whether use really is restricted or not. In other words, I was
Brian Ristuccia <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I recall a precedent here in the US where a document was not infected by the
> copyright on the fonts used therein. It seemed to say that so long as you've
> lawfully aquired a font, you're free to use it when typesetting any
> documents you like. You
On Mon, 7 Feb 2000, Brian Ristuccia wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 07, 2000 at 02:50:37PM +0100, Henning Makholm wrote:
> > Remember that we're talking about fonts. In this case "use"
> > entails reproducing the artistic contents of the font, that
> > is, the lettershapes - so IMO use of a font must be cons
On Mon, Feb 07, 2000 at 02:50:37PM +0100, Henning Makholm wrote:
> Scripsit Joseph Carter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > On Mon, Feb 07, 2000 at 12:55:53PM +0200, Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho wrote:
> > > > Use is covered by the Fair Use provision of Copyright
> > > > law. The fonts are free.
>
> > > Is this
Scripsit Joseph Carter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> On Mon, Feb 07, 2000 at 12:55:53PM +0200, Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho wrote:
> > > Use is covered by the Fair Use provision of Copyright
> > > law. The fonts are free.
> > Is this the n+1th abuse of Fair Use, or do you actually have some
> > arguments suppo
Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Is this the n+1th abuse of Fair Use, or do you actually have some
> arguments supporting that claim?
Fair Use has a different meanings in US and Europe, just like Free
Speach.
--
They say that the gods are angry when they hit you with objects
On Mon, Feb 07, 2000 at 12:55:53PM +0200, Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho wrote:
> > Nope, this is fine. Use is covered by the Fair Use provision of Copyright
> > law. The fonts are free.
>
> Is this the n+1th abuse of Fair Use, or do you actually have some
> arguments supporting that claim?
You have a
On Mon, Feb 07, 2000 at 12:19:12AM -0800, Joseph Carter wrote:
> Nope, this is fine. Use is covered by the Fair Use provision of Copyright
> law. The fonts are free.
Is this the n+1th abuse of Fair Use, or do you actually have some
arguments supporting that claim?
--
%%% Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho
Joseph Carter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> We don't have permission to redistribute (at all---why is this in
> non-free?)
It used to be in main
> Please do try to contact the Copyright holders if you can.
> This license obviously does not say what they intend it to mean.
I tried emailing t
On Mon, Feb 07, 2000 at 08:56:41PM +1300, Carey Evans wrote:
> This is something I should have sorted out a long time ago, but I
> guess I haven't gotten around to it until now.
>
> The x3270 program is currently in non-free. There are two licenses
> responsible for this, one on some of the fonts
15 matches
Mail list logo
