On Thu, Nov 28, 2002 at 01:01:15PM -0600, Igor Izyumin wrote: > There are two key differences: > 1. Mandrake does not make Crossover. Codeweavers does. They are taking most > of the risk here. It's a much smaller risk for Mandrake than including a > script that auto-installs fonts.
No difference here... I make the package. Mandrake doesn't. > 2. Crossover does not install these fonts transparently. They still present > the click-wrap in its original form, and they could argue that it's the > user's responsibility to make sure they have a right to use that piece of > software. There's no requirement to show the click-wrap in the license. Simply says that the license must be distributed with the fonts. The package easily compiles with this. It even installs the license in /usr/share/doc... > Technically, using MSIE or Windows Media Player without owning a copy of > Windows is illegal. That's why Crossover always shows a warning saying > "please read the license carefully". There's no technically about it. The license is rather explicit about it. Yet Mandrake still ships crossover, which allows you to install Windows Media Player. >From the Windows Media Player 6.4 License agreement: "NOTE: IF YOU DO NOT HAVE A VALID EULA FOR A MICROSOFT OS PRODUCT, YOU ARE NOT AUTHORIZED TO INSTALL, COPY OR OTHERWISE USE THE OPERATING SYSTEM COMPONENTS AND YOU HAVE NO RIGHTS UNDER THIS SUPPLIMENTAL EULA." I don't think they could have made it more clear. For those that don't realize it Microsoft refers to Windows Media Player as an Operating System Component throughout the license. > Don't compare apples and oranges. It's not apples and oranges... it's walking the same fine line I am. The fact that codeweavers uses Microsoft's installer program and I do not is incosequential to the license, since it makes no requirement to execute the Microsoft installer, nor does it require the display of the clickthrough license, only that it is provided with the software. > How about fixing the font packages instead? It's not that hard to make a set > of decent bitmap fonts from the TTF ones. I am pretty sure that someone > could get the FontLab people (www.pyrus.com) to donate a copy or at least > sell it at a reduced price. Then you could just fix the broken fonts (very > hard) or make bitmaps for them (easy but time-consuming). Or you could try > pfaedit, although it's not exactly a mature program. Anyway, I think a > constructive approach would be better in the long run than just recycling > Microsoft's fonts. This is not intended to be a "fix" to the situation. It's more akin to a workaround. No matter how nice of fonts we create some people will always prefer some other font. This is simply about choice and making it simple for people to make that choice. -- Ben Reser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://ben.reser.org "If you're not making any mistakes, you're flat out not trying hard enough." - Jim Nichols
