Re: Bug#156503: M$ true type fonts in non-free?

[Bart Schuller <schuller@lunatech.com>]

On Wed, Aug 14, 2002 at 08:47:31AM -0400, Eric Sharkey wrote:
> There used to be more information about Microsoft's interprettation of
> their own EULA on the font web page.  Since that page is gone, it's no
> longer there, but the gist of it was that they were taking a very very
> strict view of "a true and complete copy", to the extent that changing
> the packaging of the fonts in any way (even just changing the filename
> without changing the file contents) would make it no longer a true and
> complete copy.  They were pretty clear on this point.
> 
> In other words, no tarballs allowed.  Distribution has to be in the form
> of a collection of separate Windows 95 self-installing executables.

Then there should still be nothing wrong with packing all of those
.exe's in a tar file, for transport. The package would then be based on
the current installer package.

-- 
Bart.