Hi! Shouldn’t the COPYLEFT SIGN be a small circled L?! It’s something to think about... Thank You!
On Mon, Feb 15, 2016 at 2:29 PM, Asmus Freytag (t) <[email protected]> wrote: > On 2/15/2016 9:32 AM, Doug Ewell wrote: > > Asmus Freytag wrote: > > > with the non-standard symbols like the copyleft, there's the desire to > not encode stuff based on "passing activism". > > David Faulks wrote: > > > The samples I have seem to be from people who want to make a statement > via an anti-copyright message > > The lengthy thread from 2000, and the shorter one from 2012, show that > the objections at those times fell into three main categories: > > (1) Lack of (sufficient) evidence of use as an element of running text, > as opposed to a logo. > > I take it that this has been addressed (modulo the usual difficulties > about proving that for > unencoded symbols). > > There's an interesting passage on the FSF page "What is Copyleft?" about > this symbol: > > "It is a legal mistake to use a backwards C in a circle instead of a > copyright symbol. Copyleft is based legally on copyright, so the work > should have a copyright notice. A copyright notice requires either the > copyright symbol (a C in a circle) or the word 'Copyright'. [ ... ] A > backwards C in a circle has no special legal significance, so it doesn't > make a copyright notice." > > > Unicode has always recognized usage over official status. So this should > not be an issue. > > > (2) Concern that the symbol was a passing fad. Christopher and Ken noted > that the fact we are talking about it again 15 years later probably > answers that concern. > > Very good point. > > > (3) The social-statement aspect. > > António wrote in 2012, referring to the copyleft symbol plus the others > he just cited (e.g. Creative Commons): "I am convinced that they were > not accepted for encoding (if they were ever even formally proposed) due > purely to ideological reasons." However, I checked the UTC document > register going back to 2000 and could not find a proposal with the word > "copyleft" in its title, so perhaps these have not been proposed after > all. > > A proposal is needed, discussion on this list is useful only as far as a > proposer wants to get some suggestions on how to proceed. > > > The recent acceptance by UTC of BITCOIN SIGN, which is also often > perceived as a logo and also sometimes associated with a social > movement, might indicate greater willingness of UTC to encode the > copyleft symbol, even discounting the effects of the Emoji Revolution. > > But as always, at least for non-emoji characters, a formal proposal is > probably mandatory. > > Delete "probably". > > A./ > > > -- > Doug Ewell | http://ewellic.org | Thornton, CO 🇺🇸 > > > > > >
