Postscript fonts
6 messages in this thread
No, no, no. You cannot "copyright" or "patent" fonts. You can copyright
an original literary or film work (hence, you can copyright source code as
a literary work), and you can patent a process or invention. Raw bit-map
data falls under neither of these classifications. (You _can_ trademark a
font name, but that doesn't protect the font bit-map data). True, many of
the "commercial" font packages for the Amiga are fonts that originally from
the Mac domain. But if someone went to the effort to port those fonts to
the Amiga (and especially if they went to the effort to properly re-map the
foreign characters–not many do this though) then I see no reason why this
person shouldn't be allowed to sell them; as long as they charge a price
that is in line with the amount of effort they spent in porting them.
Hey, Jim, I'll send you the xeroxes of patents for fonts. Our lawyer
looked into it, and sure enough, some people got patents on them as
"industrial designs". As for copyright, there is little limitation on what
you send to the Copyright Office. In past jobs, I've sent hex dumps of
programs, and they accepted them just fine. If you've got a xerox of an
article about that "recent case" that says bitmap data is not protected,
that would be good to see, because it would mean that someone could rip off
bitmap data with impunity. Trademarks on names I know about. Enforcement
in the courts is the bottom line. In the Amiga market, I'm sure we can get
away with a lot, because there isn't much money here, compared to the Mac
or PC market.
If by patents on fonts, I'm sure that a company like Adobe could get a
patent on their method of generating fonts from outline information.
Patents cover processes and methods, not specific instances of a device.
As for _getting_ a copyright on a font, I have no doubt you could do it
since the Copyright office basically rubberstamps anything sent it.
However, a copyright issued from that office is useless unless it can be
enforced, and a court would not consider a rubberstamped form as truly
giving you a copyright over anything–you would still have to prove it. In
fact, the actual piece of paper from the copyright office does very little
in copyright defense cases.
I'll try to remember to look up that article about copyrighting bit-map
font data.
On getting away with a lot, sure we can; so can software rental houses, and
so can pirate BBS's. I find it distressing that our society emphasizes
what you can get away with, or how you can use the letter of the law,
rather than honoring the intent of the law. Copyright laws are intended to
protect the creator, both financially and in choosing how their works are
used. I think it's important for software developers to foster respect for
copyrights in general – be it regarding software piracy, or use of
copyrighted materials such as bitmap data created by an artist and used
without authorization in other programs/products.
Well, here it is. Check out the Oct 11 issue of MacWeek, page 55:
US Copyright Office Denies Protection for Digitized Typefaces
"The US Copyright Office last month sent a resounding no to font publishers
seeking copyright protection for digitized typefaces.
"The decision, reached after almost three years of deliberation, denies type
publishers copyright protection for 'computer instructions or data that specify
fixation or depiction of typeface or letter form.'"
It goes on to say that this not only covers bit-map font data, but outline font
descriptions as well, and that the only current recourse for type publishers
would be to go to Congress and get a law passed. The reason given for the
decision is the Copyright Office's standing policy that typefaces lack original
authorship and have a distinct utilitarian function.
James Bayless
New Horizons Software, Inc.
The Copyright Office decision may be new, but the problem is OLD and predates
things like PostScript. Assume for a moment you have full copyright protection
on a font you create. Somebody else produces an almost identical font. You try
to sue for breach of copyright. The problem becomes – "IS THIS FONT
DIFFERENT???". Thicken a few strokes by a pixel; make serifs a little pointier
or blunter, and poof! you have a new font that to the ordinary user (or even a
typographer without a magnifying glass) looks the same as the old. About the
only thing you can protect is the name, by trademark laws. Hence Helvetica,
Geneva, Swiss, and Univers are pretty d–n close to the same thing, but
different manufacturers created them.
(I work in the Printing Services dept., Univ. of Alberta. I still not-so-fondly
remember a day a few years ago where I got yelled at by a customer because I
called a particlar font one name, but she figured it should be called something
else because company x "stole" it from company y).