Re: DFSG + Hack typeface license with transition to proposed new source file build in Debian package
Florian Weimer writes ("Re: DFSG + Hack typeface license with transition to proposed new source file build in Debian package"):
> Ian Jackson:
> > Debian is not likely to accept a restriction on modifying glyphs. We
> > consider that Debian (and its downstreams and users) must be free to
> > make changes - even changes that upstreams disapprove of.
> We have historically accepted restrictions like these:
> | The programs for computer Modern are in the public domain, and readers
> | may freely generate and hand-tune their own fonts using the algorithms
> | of this book. However, use of the names is restricted: Any fonts
> | whose names cmr10 or cmbx12 or ... are identical to the standard font
> | names of this book should be fully compatible with the fonts defined
> | here; i.e., fonts with the same names are supposed to have precisely
> | the same character coding schemes and precisely the same font metric
> | files.
I don't think this is very illuminating for the Hack typeface.
The problematic restriction I said Debian was not likely to accept was
one which forbids, entirely, the creation of derivative modified
glyphs. That is not present in the text above.
A complete discussion of the status of the TeX font licence is outside
the scope of this memo :-).
Ian Jackson <email@example.com> These opinions are my own.
If I emailed you from an address @fyvzl.net or @evade.org.uk, that is
a private address which bypasses my fierce spamfilter.