4 ms·

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 h

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.
  - oldstrangers 4y ago
    You can't create a usable font using vectors. Just not how it works. You could vectorize a brand name in a font of your choice without repercussion though. And yes, people make 'clones' of fonts all the time that are ever so slightly different (Arial).
  - Springtime 4y ago
    Apart from the glyphs (the character shapes) there's also the unique kerning data, ligatures/sequences of characters that produce other outputs, hinting data (for monitor displays) and such.
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
  - maxlybbert 4y ago
    My understanding is that book publishers didn’t want the headache of knowing which printers were licensed for specific fonts, so they got a specific carveout for the shape of letters. So when they sell a book, they don’t have to worry about whether the printing company was licensed to resell the books they printed for the publisher. The “you can have a copyright on the font software” aspect seems to be based on the idea that a particular font file is just as copyrightable as, say, a computer file of a company’s employee handbook describing uncopyrightable methods and systems ( https://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ33.pdf https://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ33.pdf ). If I pay Microsoft for a cool font, I don’t have to pay extra to print and distribute documents using it, but I can’t email the font file to my friends without paying Microsoft more. It’s not clear to me how that interacts with fonts embedded in PDF files, but I believe some companies charge more to license fonts so they can be embedded in PDFs. As far as creating a font file based on the physical shape if letters: you would end up with a file similar to the original, but I doubt it would be bit-for-bit identical. So you would have a reasonable explanation of how you got the similar file without violating anybody’s copyright.
cortesoft 4y ago
> Do you think you could vectorize all the pages in a book and magically get around the copyright? No, because the text content is what is copyrighted, not the physical structure of the words on the page.
Springtime 4y ago
This was one of the motivations for ITC's founding decades ago (as per my recollection of one of Herb Lubalin's old U&lc magazine pieces) since font reproductions under different names was rampant as it was increasingly easier to reproduce (albeit most of the time with some artifacts*) and since they wanted to encourage typeface designers to still create new typefaces and pay them decently. * I distinctly remember ads in the magazine highlighting the 'authentic' fonts vs the artifacts of reproduced imitations. This was before digitization made it even more trivial. I should mention scans of these old U&lc magazines were made available in PDF form several years ago and are well worth reading (particularly the earliest issues Lubalin was involved with before his passing).

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.
- oldstrangers 4y ago
  You can't create a usable font using vectors. Just not how it works. You could vectorize a brand name in a font of your choice without repercussion though. And yes, people make 'clones' of fonts all the time that are ever so slightly different (Arial).
- Springtime 4y ago
  Apart from the glyphs (the character shapes) there's also the unique kerning data, ligatures/sequences of characters that produce other outputs, hinting data (for monitor displays) and such.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
- maxlybbert 4y ago
  My understanding is that book publishers didn’t want the headache of knowing which printers were licensed for specific fonts, so they got a specific carveout for the shape of letters. So when they sell a book, they don’t have to worry about whether the printing company was licensed to resell the books they printed for the publisher. The “you can have a copyright on the font software” aspect seems to be based on the idea that a particular font file is just as copyrightable as, say, a computer file of a company’s employee handbook describing uncopyrightable methods and systems ( https://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ33.pdf https://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ33.pdf ). If I pay Microsoft for a cool font, I don’t have to pay extra to print and distribute documents using it, but I can’t email the font file to my friends without paying Microsoft more. It’s not clear to me how that interacts with fonts embedded in PDF files, but I believe some companies charge more to license fonts so they can be embedded in PDFs. As far as creating a font file based on the physical shape if letters: you would end up with a file similar to the original, but I doubt it would be bit-for-bit identical. So you would have a reasonable explanation of how you got the similar file without violating anybody’s copyright.

cortesoft 4y ago

> Do you think you could vectorize all the pages in a book and magically get around the copyright? No, because the text content is what is copyrighted, not the physical structure of the words on the page.

Springtime 4y ago

This was one of the motivations for ITC's founding decades ago (as per my recollection of one of Herb Lubalin's old U&lc magazine pieces) since font reproductions under different names was rampant as it was increasingly easier to reproduce (albeit most of the time with some artifacts*) and since they wanted to encourage typeface designers to still create new typefaces and pay them decently. * I distinctly remember ads in the magazine highlighting the 'authentic' fonts vs the artifacts of reproduced imitations. This was before digitization made it even more trivial. I should mention scans of these old U&lc magazines were made available in PDF form several years ago and are well worth reading (particularly the earliest issues Lubalin was involved with before his passing).