To my comments
Adobe succeeded in persuading the court that a digital font is output of a computer program
and
Case law suggests, that in the U.S., if you printed out all of the characters of the revere font enlarged them with an analog pantagraph, and scanned and digitized the enlarged images, that this would not be infringement on the font in the U.S.
Owain responded
Case law, or speculation? All that you describe is several direct copies of a computer output.
causing me to note that a better way to have said this is "my informed, lay (that is to say, I am not an attourney) interpretation of case law suggests". U.S. law is not necessarily logical on this issue, and may never be. For example, one of the limitations on the rights of a copyright holder under U.S. law, is that the owner of an object subject to copyright, such as a book, or piece of music, or a letter, may "display" the object he rightfully owns. However, unless the owner has permission, it is illegal to copy the object. So if I own a first copy of say, the user's manual of Finale version 1, I can display it, but not photocopy it. Now, consider the user's manual to Finale 2006; this will be an adobe file, and to display it, the technical process involved is to "copy" the file into memory, and from a computer standpoint, copying the file into memory, and copying the file to a blank item of media is substantially the same process, but one is legal, and one is not.
ns _______________________________________________ Finale mailing list [email protected] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
