On Fri, 15 Dec 2006 09:38:07 +0000 Gervase Markham wrote: > Francesco Poli wrote: > > The clarification from MJ Ray regarding DFSG#4 made me think that > > each distinct copyright holder had a veto power on _one_ Font Name. > > At least I hoped it was so, since if each copyright holder can > > reserve an arbitrary list of Font Names, the restriction can easily > > grow up to the level it makes finding a non-reserved name nearly > > impossible. > > To make finding a non-reserved name "nearly impossible", then the list > of Reserved Font Names would need to include "nearly" all words or > pronounceable phrases in the English and every other language - > whereupon the font file would be too large to distribute with Debian > anyway. Mine was simply an extrapolation example designed for making clear what kind of problems I had in mind. OK, maybe the word "easily" was a bad choice, but anyway the important aspect was that reserving arbitrary names (I mean: that were never used in previous versions of the work) does not comply with DFSG#4. That was the point I was trying to make. -- But it is also tradition that times *must* and always do change, my friend. -- from _Coming to America_ ..................................................... Francesco Poli . GnuPG key fpr == C979 F34B 27CE 5CD8 DC12 31B5 78F4 279B DD6D FCF4
Attachment:
pgpBU_8qnucZv.pgp
Description: PGP signature