On Tue, May 12, 2009 at 11:19 PM, Dave Crossland d...@lab6.com wrote:
I feel strongly that open is also confusing because it doesn't bring
to mind the primary goal, freedom, and this has concrete disadvantages
like not publishing source files.
Open is open to abuse, yes.
He and I have been
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
Christopher Fynn wrote:
Even if it were legally permissible in the US to distribute pre-1989
fonts without a copyright notice or registered copyright - do you
believe it would be ethical do this without the designer / font creators
agreement?
Yes, because this is how copyright works.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
... Assuming Person A is using the MIT/X11 License for
their font:
Person A created a font called zfff. Uploads it to the OpenFontLibrary.
Person B downloads it, modifies it 40%, and sells it as a commercial font,
Super zfff.
Person C buys the font Super
Can we have a free version of Beowolf sans? ;-)
- Rob.
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
Openfontlibrary mailing list
Openfontlibrary@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/openfontlibrary
, Rob Myers [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Can we have a free version of Beowolf sans? ;-)
- Rob.
___
Openfontlibrary mailing list
Openfontlibrary@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/openfontlibrary
signature.asc
Alexandre Prokoudine wrote:
On Mon, Nov 3, 2008 at 8:35 PM, Dave Crossland wrote:
http://www.openfontlibrary.com/
*shrugs shoulders*
Well, the best of luck to them.
Indeed. May the best project win. Or peaceful coexistence ensue.
Is the name a problem, project identity-wise?
- Rob.
