Barry Schwartz <chemoelect...@chemoelectric.org> writes: > What matters is that the fonts are free software -- not freeware. I > myself have been reluctant to accept the OFL in part because it has > that restriction on unbundled selling. If that weren't a provision > with a loophole a couple of parsecs wide, I probably wouldn't make > OFL versions of my fonts.
I realize this approach may not be for everyone, but after thinking about the matter at some length I ended up releasing the font I created (Blooming Grove) into the public domain. My thinking was, virtually any license I could release it under would have some restrictions that might prevent it from being used in some way that I cannot necessarily anticipate beforehand. (For instance, a lot of otherwise reasonably permissive font licenses don't allow @font-face embedding, or don't allow format conversion to the special embeddable format that IE uses, because that wasn't conceived of when the license was written. I wouldn't want something like that to happen to a font that I put a lot of work into.) By releasing it completely into the public domain, all the bases are covered: I don't have to worry that someone won't be able to use it for something I didn't think about. Of course, if there are restrictions that you *do* want, then this option may not be for you. But for me, I was more interested in allowing the font to be used, rather than restricting its use. -- v4sw5Phw5ln5pr5FPO/ck2ma9u7FLw2/5l6/7i6e6t2b7/en4a3Xr5g5T http://hackerkey.com/decrypt.php?hackerkey=v4sw5PprFPOck2ma9uFw2l6i6e6t2b7en4g5T
