Re: Re: License of fonts included in X.org sources
On Thu, 20 Oct 2005, Reinhard Kotucha wrote:
"Daniel" == Daniel Stone <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> Right. As I said earlier, it's probably tied up somewhere deep
> within TOG: no-one still involved with X today remembers this at
Maybe it is sufficient to find someone at X.org who is willing to care
about the legal stuff. It is a great advantage that Thanh found
someone at Adobe who remembers.
> So, unless you really, really, really, really, really,
> really need these fonts, it's not going to be worth the effort.
There are some reasons why it's worth some effort:
This is another good example of the need for sunset provisions to ensure
that intellectual property doesn't become unavailable due to demise and/or
lack of interest of the owner.
Lacking such provisions, the effort might be used better to extend the
virtual font mechanism to allow someone to create a new Type 1 font
defining additional or replacement glyphs that will be used in combination
with some existing font. This would be sufficiently useful outside the
TeX community that I think it stands a good chance of getting broad
support. One way to implement this would be to generate a temporary local
type 1 font, so the magic would all be hidden in mktfm without the need to
change pdfviewers, ghostscript, etc.
George N. White III <email@example.com>