Geoffrey Washburn writes: > I was under the impression that by agreeing to the Berne convention, the > United States must "respect the copyright on fonts, if such copyright > exists in the countries they were designed in.
>From TITLE 17 CHAPTER 1 � 102: The Committee has considered, but chosen to defer, the possibility of protecting the design of typefaces. A typeface can be defined as a set of letters, numbers, or other symbolic characters, whose forms are related by repeating design elements consistently applied in a notational system and are intended to be embodied in articles whose intrinsic utilitarian function is for use in composing text or other cognizable combinations of characters. The Committee does not regard the design of typeface, as thus defined, to be a copyrightable pictorial, graphic, or sculptural work within the meaning of this bill and the application of the dividing line in section 101. >From TITLE 17 CHAPTER 1 � 104: (c) Effect of Berne Convention. No right or interest in a work eligible for protection under this title may be claimed by virtue of, or in reliance upon, the provisions of the Berne Convention, or the adherence of the United States thereto. Any rights in a work eligible for protection under this title that derive from this title, other Federal or State statutes, or the common law, shall not be expanded or reduced by virtue of, or in reliance upon, the provisions of the Berne Convention, or the adherence of the United States thereto. -- John Hasler [EMAIL PROTECTED] Dancing Horse Hill Elmwood, WI USA _______________________________________________ Gnu-misc-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
