[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Please check draft font license for StixFonts - is it suitably free?



* Simos Xenitellis:

> In materialising this into a concrete suggestion, do you guys suggest 
> something like:
>
> Change
> "3. The Font Software may not be modified or altered in any way, except 
> that: (a) the Fonts may be converted from one format to another (e.g., 
> from TrueType to Postscript), in which case the normal and reasonable 
> distortion that occurs during such conversion shall be permitted; and 
> (b) additional glyphs or characters may be added to the Fonts, so long 
> as the base set of glyphs is not modified or removed."
> to
> "The Font Software may not be modified or altered in any way, except 
> that: (a) the Fonts may be converted from one format to another (e.g., 
> from TrueType to Postscript), in which case the normal and reasonable 
> distortion that occurs during such conversion shall be permitted; and 
> (b) additional glyphs or characters may be added to the Fonts."
> and the rest stays the same.

>From a free software point of view, the problems remain.

> Another suggestion would then be:
>
> "You may use the license that the Bitstream Vera fonts are distributed 
> with, available at http://www.gnome.org/fonts/ (Section "Copyright").
> This license has already been approved by free and open source projects."

If I were you, I would include the license verbatim (copyright on the
license text permitting).

> All in all, I think we stand that
> http://www.stixfonts.org/user_license.html
> is equivalent with
> http://www.gnome.org/fonts/ (Copyright)
> apart from 3b which does not allow the potential modification of the 
> base glyphs (characters).
> Right?

I think so, yes.

> An argument why 3b should be amended to allow modification of the base 
> glyphs is that in practice there is little incentive to change existing 
> glyphs.

Look at a few of Debian's gsfonts bugs to get a different picture.
(The "base set of glyphs" is not defined by the license, so we have to
assume that it applies to all characters.)

In addition, removing glyphs is a very common activity.  For example,
if a copy of a font is embedded into a Postscript or PDF document,
typically only the subset which is actually used in the document is
included.  As written, the license does not permit this.



Reply to: