Re: [OpenFontLibrary] Font embedding exceptions

2009-01-05 Thread Egil Möller
Title: FreeCode Signature




Nicolas Mailhot wrote:

  
Le Lun 5 janvier 2009 13:15, Egil Möller a écrit :
  
  

  Aggregation would be the case if you distribute an ODF and a TTF in
a zip file.

  

And this would be different from including the TFF in the same
ZIP-file
as the ODF-XML-files (Hint: ODF-files _are_ zip-files!)

  
  
It would be because the ODF file is obviously an integrated work, when
a simple zip is just aggregation.

Legal definitions are not technical definitions, and the same
technical setup can fall under different legal categories depending on
how humans use it. The legal system only cares about human
interactions.
  

I fail to see the difference in human interaction too - one file,
containing two files, one of which refferences the other one in some
way.

-- 



Konsulent, Fri Programvare / Free Software Consultant
Mobil: +47 - 473 44 024
Telefon: +47 - 21 53 69 00, Fax: +47 - 21 53 69 09
Adr: Nydalsveien 30b, 3.
etg., 0484 Oslo
Web: www.freecode.no

Check out our published Free Software @ http://code.freecode.no.






signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Re: [OpenFontLibrary] Font embedding exceptions

2009-01-05 Thread Nicolas Mailhot


Le Lun 5 janvier 2009 13:15, Egil Möller a écrit :

 Aggregation would be the case if you distribute an ODF and a TTF in
 a zip file.

 And this would be different from including the TFF in the same
 ZIP-file
 as the ODF-XML-files (Hint: ODF-files _are_ zip-files!)

It would be because the ODF file is obviously an integrated work, when
a simple zip is just aggregation.

Legal definitions are not technical definitions, and the same
technical setup can fall under different legal categories depending on
how humans use it. The legal system only cares about human
interactions.

-- 
Nicolas Mailhot



Re: [OpenFontLibrary] Font embedding exceptions

2009-01-05 Thread Egil Möller
Title: FreeCode Signature






  
Aggregation would be the case if you distribute an ODF and a TTF in a zip file.
  

And this would be different from including the TFF in the same ZIP-file
as the ODF-XML-files (Hint: ODF-files _are_ zip-files!)

-- 



Konsulent, Fri Programvare / Free Software Consultant
Mobil: +47 - 473 44 024
Telefon: +47 - 21 53 69 00, Fax: +47 - 21 53 69 09
Adr: Nydalsveien 30b, 3.
etg., 0484 Oslo
Web: www.freecode.no

Check out our published Free Software @ http://code.freecode.no.






signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Re: [OpenFontLibrary] Font embedding exceptions

2009-01-03 Thread Nicolas Mailhot
Le mercredi 31 décembre 2008 à 11:37 +, Rob Myers a écrit :
 On Wed, Dec 31, 2008 at 11:23 AM, Dave Crossland d...@lab6.com wrote:
  2008/12/30 Jon Stanley jonstan...@gmail.com:
  On Tue, Dec 30, 2008 at 3:47 PM,  fontfree...@aol.com wrote:
 
  The output from running a covered work is covered by this License only if
  the output, given its
  content, constitutes a covered work.
 
  Since you are embedding a font, which is itself a covered work,
  unmodified into the document, an exception is required. The end.
 
  +1
 
 A theoretical dissenting view:
 
 The document is not software and is not a derivative of the font.
 Including the font with the document, which can be used without it, is
 mere aggregation.

This is an academic distinction, all major electronic document formats
(odf, pdf, doc, html) can include js or vb active code

The correct answer to the original question is that lack of the
exception produces legal incertitude, and good FLOSS citizens do *not*
want to expose their users to legal incertitude, so they add the
exception and the problem is solved.

-- 
Nicolas Mailhot


signature.asc
Description: Ceci est une partie de message numériquement signée


Re: [OpenFontLibrary] Font embedding exceptions

2008-12-31 Thread Dave Crossland
2008/12/30 Jon Stanley jonstan...@gmail.com:
 On Tue, Dec 30, 2008 at 3:47 PM,  fontfree...@aol.com wrote:

 The output from running a covered work is covered by this License only if
 the output, given its
 content, constitutes a covered work.

 Since you are embedding a font, which is itself a covered work,
 unmodified into the document, an exception is required. The end.

+1


Re: [OpenFontLibrary] Font embedding exceptions

2008-12-31 Thread Rob Myers
On Wed, Dec 31, 2008 at 11:23 AM, Dave Crossland d...@lab6.com wrote:
 2008/12/30 Jon Stanley jonstan...@gmail.com:
 On Tue, Dec 30, 2008 at 3:47 PM,  fontfree...@aol.com wrote:

 The output from running a covered work is covered by this License only if
 the output, given its
 content, constitutes a covered work.

 Since you are embedding a font, which is itself a covered work,
 unmodified into the document, an exception is required. The end.

 +1

A theoretical dissenting view:

The document is not software and is not a derivative of the font.
Including the font with the document, which can be used without it, is
mere aggregation.

- Rob.


Re: [OpenFontLibrary] Font embedding exceptions

2008-12-31 Thread Dave Crossland
2008/12/31 Rob Myers r...@robmyers.org:

 The document is not software

The GPL applies to 'works' not software, so this is irrelevant.

 and is not a derivative of the font.

Derivative works in copyright law are not intuitive; a work made by
combining 2 works is a 'derivative' of both works. So a PDF that
embeds a font is indeed a derivative work of the font.

 Including the font with the document, which can be used without it, is
 mere aggregation.

Aggregation would be the case if you distribute an ODF and a TTF in a zip file.

-- 
Regards,
Dave