Noel Stoutenburg wrote:

As I understand it, the gist of the ruling 
> is that because computer fonts are produced by processing through 
> software, they are computer programs, and eligible for copyright 
> protection, where the exact same typeface, if engraved into a die, and 
> cast, would not be.
> ns

The rationale behind this is that an engraved die is a form of graphic art, wh. by 
long tradition (and copyright law) may be freelty copied by non-mechanical means. If a 
student goes to an art gallery and carefully copies a painting seen there, no 
permission from the original painter is required, even if the copy is then sold. The 
same is true of, for example, book illustrations. All the instrument drawings in my 
_Handbook of Instrumentation_ were traced, using a light table, directly from non-PD 
photographs. this was perfectly legal. If I'd simply xeroxed the photos, however, it 
wouldn't have been.

Software, by contrast, more closely resembles the written word, and therefore follows 
the kind of copyright tradition developed for books and the like--even if the point of 
the software is to produce a graphic design.

_______________________________________________
Finale mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

Reply via email to