Christopher Fynn wrote: > This site <http://www.theleagueofmoveabletype.com/> distributes fonts > under the Creative Commons Attribution Share Alike Licence > <http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/> > Which allows copying, distribution and attributed derivative works under > the same, similar or a compatible license. > > Is this an acceptable license for the Open Font Library?
I would say no: because of the major issue that Creative Commons licenses are designed and used for content and not software. CC strongly discourages using a CC combination for software: http://wiki.creativecommons.org/FAQ#Can_I_use_a_Creative_Commons_license_for_software.3F IMHO we don't want to add extra confusion to the choice of licenses. > The terms seem effectively similar to those of SIL's Open Font License. Mmm, not really. Where's the explicit embedding provision? the explicit bundling provision? The name change provision to protect collisions and keep artistic integrity while allowing branching? the font-specific vocabulary? > - Chris -- Nicolas Spalinger, NRSI volunteer Debian/Ubuntu font teams / OpenFontLibrary http://planet.open-fonts.org
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
