6 ms·

The silliest thing I learned years ago was that the license only applies to the "software" of the font. In the US, you can literally go and vectorize any font i

The silliest thing I learned years ago was that the license only applies to the "software" of the font. In the US, you can literally go and vectorize any font in the world and do whatever you want with it. "In the United States, the shapes of typefaces are not eligible for copyright, though the shapes may be protected by design patent (although these are rarely applied for, the first US design patent ever awarded was for a typeface)." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intellectual_property_protection_of_typefaces https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intellectual_property_protecti... Also from somebodynew: "A US federal court held that typeface designs cannot be copyrighted in Eltra Corp. v. Ringer in 1978. Federal regulations made this explicit in 37 CFR 202.1(e) in 1992. The government's explanation here [1] makes it explicit that typefaces are not subject to copyright protection, while fonts can be copyrighted as computer software." [1] https://cdn.loc.gov/copyright/history/mls/ML-393.pdf https://cdn.loc.gov/copyright/history/mls/ML-393.pdf

perk 4y ago
I've read something along this lines before, but cannot find a good source for it. Do you have one?
- ghaff 4y ago
  Basically fonts are copyrightable but typefaces are not. Font names are also trademarkable. https://glarts.org/font-and-typeface-legal-tip-sheet/ https://glarts.org/font-and-typeface-legal-tip-sheet/
  - luckylion 4y ago
    If that holds up in court, why aren't there free/open source/cheaper versions of typefaces that look just like some font but are named differently?
    - ghaff 4y ago
      There are. (With the caveat of look the same as some typeface. Not all the kerning and so forth may be identical.) Overpass is one example I'm familiar with off the top of my head but there are many. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overpass_(typeface) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overpass_(typeface) Arial, notably, is also similar to (though distinguishable from with some letterforms) Helvetica.
    - dspillett 4y ago
      There are: for quite a famous example see Monotype's Arial which is effectively free for Windows/Office users and is mostly indistinguishable from Helvetica by people who are not typography experts. Most free clones are not as good in various ways, and good clones that are charged for probably get earn their creators a letter from a foundry's legal team that makes them decide that the cost (time and money) of defending their position (even though they should eventually win) is not worth it.
  - ntrz 4y ago
    This sounds like a typeface is not copyrightable but only because the mechanism for protection is different (patent system). So by doing what the GP suggests you wouldn't be violating copyright, but you may be in violation of the design patent on the typeface?
    - ghaff 4y ago
      I'm not sure how common design patents are though. Relative to copyright, patents are much shorter duration and much more expensive and time-consuming to get whereas copyrights just happen (though you may want to register for greater protection--but that's still cheap and easy.
      - ntrz 4y ago
        Yeah, agreed that it seems unlikely to be a problem for most typefaces. I just think it's a bit misleading to suggest it's guaranteed to unburden the typeface of any and all 'intellectual property' protections ("In the US, you can literally go and vectorize any font in the world and do whatever you want with it").
        ghaff 4y ago
        And, of course, I can sue you for copying my typeface even if I'll probably lose in court and you probably don't want to spend at least 5 figures in lawyers to defend your open source typeface design.
- somebodynew 4y ago
  A US federal court held that typeface designs cannot be copyrighted in Eltra Corp. v. Ringer in 1978. Federal regulations made this explicit in 37 CFR 202.1(e) in 1992. The government's explanation here [1] makes it explicit that typefaces are not subject to copyright protection, while fonts can be copyrighted as computer software. [1] https://cdn.loc.gov/copyright/history/mls/ML-393.pdf https://cdn.loc.gov/copyright/history/mls/ML-393.pdf
- dspillett 4y ago
  As far as I know it is a quirk of the US copyright system, so may not apply the same globally. First reasonable one that came up in a quick search: https://www.crowdspring.com/blog/font-law-licensing/#:~:text=Does%20copyright%20law%20protect%20typefaces,fonts%20are%20programs%20or%20software https://www.crowdspring.com/blog/font-law-licensing/#:~:text...).
selivanovp 4y ago
Not really, it depends on license agreement. For example today I integrated just another font to a customer’s website and license agreements had paragraphs about suing in case of attempts to copy/modify or any other way meddling with the font or its visual representation. Obviously, you still can make a copy of any font and change it a little, but you can be sued for this.
- oldstrangers 4y ago
  Yes, copying or modifying the actual software. You're free to transform the shape and style of a vectorized font as much as you want.
- goosedragons 4y ago
  It depends where you live. In the U.S it seems that typefaces can't have copyright protection, the font file ITSELF has copyright protection because it's a "computer program" for generating a typeface. In theory in the U.S you can take a typeface, create your own font file and use it as you see fit. Of course you might run into trouble and prove that you created your own font file. Other countries like Germany it seems DO give protection to typefaces so you can't just copy a typeface exactly.
torstenvl 4y ago
IANAIPL but IAAL and I'm skeptical of this, at least in the U.S. There's nothing in title 17 AFAIK that explicitly allows this, and it is quite different from how copyright works for all other categories of works. I'd be interested in a citation if you have one. Do you think you could vectorize all the pages in a book and magically get around the copyright? EDIT: Thank you for providing the citation. Interesting! I'm not sure I agree with the court's analysis in ELTRA Corp., but the codification in the CFR obviates any difference of opinion on the matter.
- oldstrangers 4y ago
  "Do you think you could vectorize all the pages in a book and magically get around the copyright?" ...what? The specific shapes and style of a font are not protected under copyright. It's only the software. "A US federal court held that typeface designs cannot be copyrighted in Eltra Corp. v. Ringer in 1978. Federal regulations made this explicit in 37 CFR 202.1(e) in 1992. The government's explanation here [1] makes it explicit that typefaces are not subject to copyright protection, while fonts can be copyrighted as computer software." [1] https://cdn.loc.gov/copyright/history/mls/ML-393.pdf https://cdn.loc.gov/copyright/history/mls/ML-393.pdf
  - pc86 4y ago
    OK so you vectorize some commercial font then release it for free. Haven't you essentially just recreated the software, which is copyrighted? Haven't you still violated copyright just with extra steps? It seems like a distinction without a difference.
    - derbOac 4y ago
      Usually people don't just vectorize the font and rerelease it without any modifications. Usually there's some small stylistic changes made, which most people wouldn't notice, but type designers are attuned to. So then it's a substantive change. I think this is the logic behind the legal decision: that the glyphs put constraints on things enough that it would be difficult to navigate legally in many cases.
paxys 4y ago
This may be true but you are discounting how hard it is to create your own font from scratch. If one could do it, they probably wouldn't be in the market for a font license in the first place. The vast majority of website builders want/need a 1-click solution. Kinda like saying hey, every SaaS service out there can legally be rebuilt in-house with the same look and behavior, so why pay for any of them?
- oldstrangers 4y ago
  I'm not arguing for creating your own font. I'm just expressing how silly the law is. Of all the things I thought a copyright law would protect, I'd assume it would be the actual artistic visualization of a font, and not the software that it runs on.
  - manuelmoreale 4y ago
    I might be wrong but I think the issue is that there are typeface extremely similar to each other and so it would be hard to figure out when something is actually a new design. Arial/Helvetica is the classic example. Personally, I wouldn’t even know how to approach this issue from a legal standpoint.
- anononaut 4y ago
  Seems to me like it wouldn't be that difficult to automate vectorizing whatever ttf.
  - hunter2_ 4y ago
    But fonts are more than just typeface vectors. For example, it's code can cause any conceivable string of characters to look different than simply rendering each glyph immediately next to each other; sometimes it's kerning tweaks, sometimes combinations get replaced with completely different glyphs (like "f" and "i" next to each other often having an undotted "i": look closely at "fi" depending on the font).
Connor_Creegan 4y ago
[dead]

perk 4y ago

I've read something along this lines before, but cannot find a good source for it. Do you have one?

ghaff 4y ago
Basically fonts are copyrightable but typefaces are not. Font names are also trademarkable. https://glarts.org/font-and-typeface-legal-tip-sheet/ https://glarts.org/font-and-typeface-legal-tip-sheet/
- luckylion 4y ago
  If that holds up in court, why aren't there free/open source/cheaper versions of typefaces that look just like some font but are named differently?
  - ghaff 4y ago
    There are. (With the caveat of look the same as some typeface. Not all the kerning and so forth may be identical.) Overpass is one example I'm familiar with off the top of my head but there are many. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overpass_(typeface) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overpass_(typeface) Arial, notably, is also similar to (though distinguishable from with some letterforms) Helvetica.
  - dspillett 4y ago
    There are: for quite a famous example see Monotype's Arial which is effectively free for Windows/Office users and is mostly indistinguishable from Helvetica by people who are not typography experts. Most free clones are not as good in various ways, and good clones that are charged for probably get earn their creators a letter from a foundry's legal team that makes them decide that the cost (time and money) of defending their position (even though they should eventually win) is not worth it.
- ntrz 4y ago
  This sounds like a typeface is not copyrightable but only because the mechanism for protection is different (patent system). So by doing what the GP suggests you wouldn't be violating copyright, but you may be in violation of the design patent on the typeface?
  - ghaff 4y ago
    I'm not sure how common design patents are though. Relative to copyright, patents are much shorter duration and much more expensive and time-consuming to get whereas copyrights just happen (though you may want to register for greater protection--but that's still cheap and easy.
    - ntrz 4y ago
      Yeah, agreed that it seems unlikely to be a problem for most typefaces. I just think it's a bit misleading to suggest it's guaranteed to unburden the typeface of any and all 'intellectual property' protections ("In the US, you can literally go and vectorize any font in the world and do whatever you want with it").
      - ghaff 4y ago
        And, of course, I can sue you for copying my typeface even if I'll probably lose in court and you probably don't want to spend at least 5 figures in lawyers to defend your open source typeface design.
somebodynew 4y ago
A US federal court held that typeface designs cannot be copyrighted in Eltra Corp. v. Ringer in 1978. Federal regulations made this explicit in 37 CFR 202.1(e) in 1992. The government's explanation here [1] makes it explicit that typefaces are not subject to copyright protection, while fonts can be copyrighted as computer software. [1] https://cdn.loc.gov/copyright/history/mls/ML-393.pdf https://cdn.loc.gov/copyright/history/mls/ML-393.pdf
dspillett 4y ago
As far as I know it is a quirk of the US copyright system, so may not apply the same globally. First reasonable one that came up in a quick search: https://www.crowdspring.com/blog/font-law-licensing/#:~:text=Does%20copyright%20law%20protect%20typefaces,fonts%20are%20programs%20or%20software https://www.crowdspring.com/blog/font-law-licensing/#:~:text...).

selivanovp 4y ago

Not really, it depends on license agreement. For example today I integrated just another font to a customer’s website and license agreements had paragraphs about suing in case of attempts to copy/modify or any other way meddling with the font or its visual representation. Obviously, you still can make a copy of any font and change it a little, but you can be sued for this.

oldstrangers 4y ago
Yes, copying or modifying the actual software. You're free to transform the shape and style of a vectorized font as much as you want.
goosedragons 4y ago
It depends where you live. In the U.S it seems that typefaces can't have copyright protection, the font file ITSELF has copyright protection because it's a "computer program" for generating a typeface. In theory in the U.S you can take a typeface, create your own font file and use it as you see fit. Of course you might run into trouble and prove that you created your own font file. Other countries like Germany it seems DO give protection to typefaces so you can't just copy a typeface exactly.

torstenvl 4y ago

IANAIPL but IAAL and I'm skeptical of this, at least in the U.S. There's nothing in title 17 AFAIK that explicitly allows this, and it is quite different from how copyright works for all other categories of works. I'd be interested in a citation if you have one. Do you think you could vectorize all the pages in a book and magically get around the copyright? EDIT: Thank you for providing the citation. Interesting! I'm not sure I agree with the court's analysis in ELTRA Corp., but the codification in the CFR obviates any difference of opinion on the matter.

oldstrangers 4y ago
"Do you think you could vectorize all the pages in a book and magically get around the copyright?" ...what? The specific shapes and style of a font are not protected under copyright. It's only the software. "A US federal court held that typeface designs cannot be copyrighted in Eltra Corp. v. Ringer in 1978. Federal regulations made this explicit in 37 CFR 202.1(e) in 1992. The government's explanation here [1] makes it explicit that typefaces are not subject to copyright protection, while fonts can be copyrighted as computer software." [1] https://cdn.loc.gov/copyright/history/mls/ML-393.pdf https://cdn.loc.gov/copyright/history/mls/ML-393.pdf
- pc86 4y ago
  OK so you vectorize some commercial font then release it for free. Haven't you essentially just recreated the software, which is copyrighted? Haven't you still violated copyright just with extra steps? It seems like a distinction without a difference.
  - derbOac 4y ago
    Usually people don't just vectorize the font and rerelease it without any modifications. Usually there's some small stylistic changes made, which most people wouldn't notice, but type designers are attuned to. So then it's a substantive change. I think this is the logic behind the legal decision: that the glyphs put constraints on things enough that it would be difficult to navigate legally in many cases.

paxys 4y ago

This may be true but you are discounting how hard it is to create your own font from scratch. If one could do it, they probably wouldn't be in the market for a font license in the first place. The vast majority of website builders want/need a 1-click solution. Kinda like saying hey, every SaaS service out there can legally be rebuilt in-house with the same look and behavior, so why pay for any of them?

oldstrangers 4y ago
I'm not arguing for creating your own font. I'm just expressing how silly the law is. Of all the things I thought a copyright law would protect, I'd assume it would be the actual artistic visualization of a font, and not the software that it runs on.
- manuelmoreale 4y ago
  I might be wrong but I think the issue is that there are typeface extremely similar to each other and so it would be hard to figure out when something is actually a new design. Arial/Helvetica is the classic example. Personally, I wouldn’t even know how to approach this issue from a legal standpoint.
anononaut 4y ago
Seems to me like it wouldn't be that difficult to automate vectorizing whatever ttf.
- hunter2_ 4y ago
  But fonts are more than just typeface vectors. For example, it's code can cause any conceivable string of characters to look different than simply rendering each glyph immediately next to each other; sometimes it's kerning tweaks, sometimes combinations get replaced with completely different glyphs (like "f" and "i" next to each other often having an undotted "i": look closely at "fi" depending on the font).

Connor_Creegan 4y ago

[dead]