Re: New license of the fonts

[Walter Landry <wlandry@ucsd.edu>]

Pedro Reina <pedro@pedroreina.org> wrote:
> >> In all the three examples, we arise the same point: the license of 
> >> your team work is great, but is not 100% compatible with our 
> >> guidelines about free software. And I think, my friend, that we all 
> >> think pretty much the same way about what freedom must be in this 
> >> information era.
> > 
> > I certainly have no problem with that. I wish Jose, Miguel, Roberto and 
> > their crews the best of luck in advancing their projects. My only 
> > concern with making any lab fonts public domain is the possibility of 
> > people selling them. I don't mind if people charge nominal fees for 
> > handling the software's storage devices, or a small fee for distribution 
> > services, but I am really opposed to someone selling the fonts that I 
> > make and give away for free. As you said later in your email, maybe this 
> > is something that the legal team of GNOME can help me solve with 
> > appropriate licensing that can keep the GNU crowd happy while at the 
> > same time things don't turn commercial and the font designer's credit 
> > doesn't get lost in the flood of future changes.

The first section of the Debian Free Software Guidelines states:

  The license of a Debian component may not restrict any party from
  selling or giving away the software as a component of an aggregate
  software distribution containing programs from several different
  sources. The license may not require a royalty or other fee for such
  sale.

So if the license has something like, "This product may not be sold",
that is a problem.  But if you (Apostrophe) want to prevent anyone
from making lots of money off of your fonts, then the GNU GPL is an
excellent way to do so.  Everyone who distributes the fonts must
inform everyone who receives it that the fonts are free, and can be
redistributed without fee.  That tends to reduce the price that can be
charged for the fonts, because the sellers have to compete against
free redistribution.

Is there any other reason that the GPL would not be suitable?

Regards,
Walter Landry
wlandry@ucsd.edu