On Sat, 22 Nov 2003, Anthony DeRobertis wrote: > In the United States, fonts can't be copyrighted. Only "font > programs" (e.g., the PostScript code used to produce the glyph) can > be. So there can be no copyright on bitmap fonts, and using a bitmap > font, a printout, or even tracing over an image on screen is > perfectly legal. I'm not sure that Fiest v Rural Telephone can lead us down this road. Assuming the font is a work of authorship (which many large or relatively large bitmap and TT fonts are) claiming a copyright on it is an entirely reasonable thing to do. Can someone who holds that non-trivial bitmap fonts [eg. fonts larger than ~4x5 pixels] cannot be copyrighted please walk through the rational for their position? [Ideally including case law citations.] (I mean, copyright almost surely applies to works of art primarily made up of fonts... things like Charles Demuth's "The Figure 5 in Gold") Don Armstrong -- A citizen of America will cross the ocean to fight for democracy, but won't cross the street to vote in a national election. -- Bill Vaughan http://www.donarmstrong.com http://www.anylevel.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature