Re: [OpenFontLibrary] OFL problems, IPA License annoyances

2009-04-08 Thread Nicolas Mailhot


Le Mar 7 avril 2009 20:53, Alexandre Prokoudine a écrit :

 On Tue, Apr 7, 2009 at 10:35 PM, Dave Crossland wrote:

 And as I said, I would prefer to avoid a new version of OFL until
 there is a real world example of the OFLv1.1 being defective; until
 then, the FAQ updates are the best response.

 Amen to that? :)

I don't want this to turn into a flamewar, but consider that new font
projects are being started all the time. They're choosing their
license now. Later for the usual reasons it will be very difficult to
make them switch. It would be much nicer for them if they could start
with an OFL version everyone agreed was solid (even if the
disagreement is not tastefully expressed).

-- 
Nicolas Mailhot



Re: [OpenFontLibrary] OFL problems, IPA License annoyances

2009-04-07 Thread Nicolas Mailhot


Le Mar 7 avril 2009 10:09, Dave Crossland a écrit :

 2009/4/7 Nicolas Mailhot nicolas.mail...@laposte.net:

 They would have been better advised to lay minimal conditions in
 simple words and not let their lawyers pile up unrelated fell-good
 material in the licensing.

 Given I basically like the OFL, which is worded as you suggest, I
 agree :-)

 What do you think about Perens criticism of the OFL?

I think he may have a point. Though addressing his point should not
require full rewrite of the license, just of the problem paragraph
(another bit should be clarifying the renaming clauses and make it
clear they're an option authors can shoose not to exercise).

Also, even if the OFL was perfected, the FSF has sufficient moral
clout that we need a GPL-ish FSF-endorsed font license, because many
people will just refuse to use anything else.

-- 
Nicolas Mailhot



Re: [OpenFontLibrary] OFL problems, IPA License annoyances

2009-04-07 Thread Dave Crossland
2009/4/7 Ed Trager ed.tra...@gmail.com:

 this newly published IPA Font License in English finally clears the
 way for inclusion of the IPA fonts in Linux distributions ...

Sounds like a good result, as long as it isn't promoted as best practice :-)


Re: [OpenFontLibrary] OFL problems, IPA License annoyances

2009-04-07 Thread Alexandre Prokoudine
On Tue, Apr 7, 2009 at 10:35 PM, Dave Crossland wrote:

 And as I said, I would prefer to avoid a new version of OFL until
 there is a real world example of the OFLv1.1 being defective; until
 then, the FAQ updates are the best response.

Amen to that? :)

Alexandre


Re: [OpenFontLibrary] OFL problems, IPA License annoyances

2009-04-07 Thread Dave Crossland
2009/4/7 Nicolas Spalinger nicolas_spalin...@sil.org:
 Though addressing his point should not
 require full rewrite of the license, just of the problem paragraph
 (another bit should be clarifying the renaming clauses and make it
 clear they're an option authors can shoose not to exercise).

 As indicated earlier, we feel this is sufficiently clarified in the OFL
 FAQ.

And as I said, I would prefer to avoid a new version of OFL until
there is a real world example of the OFLv1.1 being defective; until
then, the FAQ updates are the best response.


Re: [OpenFontLibrary] OFL problems, IPA License annoyances

2009-04-07 Thread Nicolas Spalinger
 OTOH there's the great work of Arne Gotje on CJK fonts which may  well 
 provide the community with a .jp font family with more
 re-usable and community-known licensing.
 
 And also don't forget the work of the WenQuanYi project, http://wenq.org/

Thanks for pointing that out.
(it's hard for me to follow the development of this project as my
understanding of Japanese is well... extremely limited).

 But Japanese users may still argue that Gotje's project and the
 WenQuanYi project are both Chinese font projects and that there are
 stylistic differences among a subset of the Japanese Kanji ...
 
 Gotje is addressing the (actually very few ... ) stylistic differences
 directly using TTC.  At this point in time, I'm not sure how or if the
 WQY project is dealing with the national glyph style differences ...

Good point, I should ping Arne about this someday.

 Best - Ed


-- 
Nicolas Spalinger, NRSI volunteer
Debian/Ubuntu font teams / OpenFontLibrary
http://planet.open-fonts.org




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Re: [OpenFontLibrary] OFL problems, IPA License annoyances

2009-04-06 Thread Ed Trager
Hi, All,

I've added IPA license detection to Fontaine:


r20 | edtrager | 2009-04-06 17:40:31 -0400 (Mon, 06 Apr 2009) | 1 line

Added Information-technology Promotion Agency, Japan (IPA) license
which is now an Open Source approved license
(http://opensource.org/licenses/ipafont.html). Thanks to Dave
Crossland for this information.


- Ed


On Mon, Apr 6, 2009 at 3:54 PM, Dave Crossland d...@lab6.com wrote:
 Hi,

 More licensing curmudgeon-ry from me I'm afraid :-)

 A new OSI approved font license is out, the Japanese IPA Font License:

http://opensource.org/licenses/ipafont.html

 The OFLB is only going to run with the most popular free font
 licenses, to encourage license consolidation, so I doubt the OFLB will
 accept IFL fonts anyway.

 So, if you're not interested in font licensing, please note the
 existence of the license and mark this thread as read :-)

 I wonder if the story of its creation will be published to the same
 extent that the SIL OFL process has been documented; I guess that
 there was some kind of wrestling match between proprietary-minded font
 developers and freedom-minded customers.

 Some of the history is revealed with a quick search: Bruce Perens has
 been helpfully guiding the drafts of this -
 http://perens.com/blog/?s=open+font - although, sadly, his original
 objections which I share about only distributing derived versions as
 diff files - 
 http://www.crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?17:mss:516:200902:ahjoeececbbcpiajppfi
 - apply to the final OSI approved license.

 Although I'm happy some Japanese fonts are being released with an OSI
 approved license, this diff requirement makes it a very poor license
 IMO. The draft Perens linked to at
 http://ipafont.ipa.go.jp/enduser_license_draft090304.pdf has the
 makings of a much better license, and is probably only interesting to
 me so I'll skip over my thoughts about it here.

 However, the key thing about the license is that it (appears to) patch
 the PDF loophole that Perens claims the SIL OFL has at
 http://perens.com/blog/2009/02/17/64/

loophole that would allow the conversion of any font under the
 license to public domain

 OFL S5: he Font Software, modified or unmodified, in part or in
 whole, must be distributed entirely under this license, and must not
 be distributed under any other license. The requirement for fonts to
 remain under this license does not apply to any document created using
 the Font Software.
 - http://scripts.sil.org/cms/scripts/page.php?site_id=nrsiid=OFL_web

 IFL S2.4: In the case of a Digital Document File containing Embedded
 Fonts created by embedding such fonts to the extent allowed under this
 Agreement, the Recipient may conduct Reproduction and Other
 Exploitation of the Digital Document File, without requiring the
 Recipient of such Digital Document File to comply with this Agreement.
  For the avoidance of doubt, such Recipient may not create and conduct
 Reproduction and Other Exploitation of a Derived Program from such
 Digital Document File except according to the terms of this
 Agreement.
 - http://opensource.org/licenses/ipafont.html

 I hope this will help in the updating of the GNU GPL Font Exception :-)

 Cheers
 Dave



Re: [OpenFontLibrary] OFL problems, IPA License annoyances

2009-04-06 Thread Dave Crossland
Well well, a positive result for license chat :)

Awesome work ed!

Regards, Dave

On 6 Apr 2009, 10:44 PM, Ed Trager ed.tra...@gmail.com wrote:

Hi, All,

I've added IPA license detection to Fontaine:


r20 | edtrager | 2009-04-06 17:40:31 -0400 (Mon, 06 Apr 2009) | 1 line

Added Information-technology Promotion Agency, Japan (IPA) license
which is now an Open Source approved license
(http://opensource.org/licenses/ipafont.html). Thanks to Dave
Crossland for this information.


- Ed

On Mon, Apr 6, 2009 at 3:54 PM, Dave Crossland d...@lab6.com wrote:  Hi,
  More licensing cur...