9 ms·

Client harassed by The Type founders for using Proxima Nova font on website

107 points by mcenedella 3y ago

RobotToaster 3y ago
It's not even a particularly nice font, it looks rather corporate memphis.
- agloe_dreams 3y ago
  It was viral for a period in the early 2010s, a kinda mix between a Grotesk (like helvetica) and Futura. Kinda like Helvetica for those who wanted more 'feeling'. But it's a bit stale by now TBH.
2Gkashmiri 3y ago
i dream that an overworked, tired patent/copyright troll sends me a threatening legal notice for using something stupid like fonts or a a css class or a color hue ala pantone colors in a website of mine which threatens me with financial ruin by implicating me using DMCA or some american legislation..... i just want to experience this. i don't have a legal notice fetish if that is what you are thinking, i just... want to see a stupid letter threatening me which i can laugh off. remember TBP people had a public page many many years ago which had DMCA notices and their replies. That.....
- eli 3y ago
  I don't think it's an empty threat. What's your plan for when they sue you?
  - 2Gkashmiri 3y ago
    uh,,, not live in the US for starters?
- ceejayoz 3y ago
  TBP laughed it off, but they still went to jail. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Pirate_Bay_trial https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Pirate_Bay_trial
  - realusername 3y ago
    With a dubious procedure, the trial was a farce. Lawyers aren't going to help when the judges themselves are corrupted.
- siva7 3y ago
  be careful what you wish for
- anon____ 3y ago
  Put the Free Speech Flag on your website. Its colors represent an illegal number. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_Speech_Flag https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_Speech_Flag https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illegal_number https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illegal_number
- DrawTR 3y ago
  > i just... want to see a stupid letter threatening me which i can laugh off. Are you familiar with the UK's TV licensing notices? Those are really funny
- __MatrixMan__ 3y ago
  Surely there's a better way to maximize the amount of these people's time you're wasting than to merely use the font and laugh when they send you a letter that you intend to ignore. Like perhaps we compromise a site and switch the font so that they sue our target. I'm not sure what that target should be. Either another group of trolls that the world would be better off without, or we bait them into a fight they can't win. Get them to sue their own law firm or something.
  - RobotToaster 3y ago
    Somehow switching the font on Oracle's site would be fun.
    - masfuerte 3y ago
      While sneaking an Oracle database instance into Adobe's backend.
      - __MatrixMan__ 3y ago
        As much as I'd enjoy watching Oracle and Adobe tear each other apart, we have to make sure that https://thetypefounders.com/ https://thetypefounders.com/ goes down with them. Presumably they have some kind of credentials with adobe? We need to frame them for the hacks (this development only to surface after Oracle and Adobe have sunk millions into this). To manufacture a motive, we can plant evidence that whatever bunch of lawyers is behind the harassment believed that they could also make money from Oracle v Adobe.
- GuB-42 3y ago
  > a color hue ala pantone colors Pantone don't own colors, what they own is the relationship between the name they have given and the color it represents. So you can use the RGB representation of Pantone colors, no problem. You can also say "the logo color is Pantone XYZ". What you are not allowed to do is, for example, make an image processing tool that converts between Pantone color names and RGB values. And even that is debated. Pantone is a color matching service. The idea is that you can say "use Pantone XYZ" and you know exactly how it will look like everywhere, be it on screen, in print, or as a plastic part, and Pantone business is to sell reference material that helps ensuring it is the case. And you can't use Pantone on the web anyways, browsers don't support it (because they don't have a license), you will have to use RGB values or whatever CSS supports.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
  - 2Gkashmiri 3y ago
    just humor me, what if we create a color matching service that actually does nothing but "shows" that it does work. it doesn't actually have to work, only get the pantone lawyers all excited
tyingq 3y ago
I hadn't looked at the business model for fonts for a while. Looking at https://store.typenetwork.com/ https://store.typenetwork.com/ , each style of Proxima Nova (regular, bold, italic, etc) is priced à la carte, and for web use you can't really buy it, you rent it. Up to $1,015.00/year if you have 2.5M views/month. Edit: Shared not because it's particularly relevant for the legal aspects, just for some relative idea of what it would cost if you did pay for a license from the party that's unhappy.
- ceejayoz 3y ago
  Here, though, the OP is using Adobe Fonts. https://fonts.adobe.com/fonts/proxima-nova https://fonts.adobe.com/fonts/proxima-nova > Licensing Information > The full Adobe Fonts library is cleared for both personal and commercial use. > As with everything from Adobe Fonts, you can use these fonts for: ... Website Publishing: Create a Web Project to add any font from our service to your website Either Adobe has a license, and the foundry is fucking up, or Adobe doesn't have a license, and Adobe has fucked up. In neither case should this be OP's problem.
  - sbarre 3y ago
    At least as far back as 2018 there's also a distinction between using the font when designing website assets that will be graphics like JPEGs or PNGs, vs embedding the font files themselves to use for the text elements of the website. Agencies used to get in trouble all the time back in the day for embedding font files in client websites that they had only licensed for offline use in Illustration/Photoshop/etc.
  - jfk13 3y ago
    > Website Publishing: Create a Web Project to add any font from our service to your website It doesn't say "...add any font from our service to websites for your clients", though.
    - LordAtlas 3y ago
      It seems to me that the client would need a Creative Cloud subscription of their own to serve the fonts for their website.
drcongo 3y ago
Adobe gonna Adobe.
bondarchuk 3y ago
Ah, there we have it (a few comments down): >Simonson designed Proxima Nova, his fonts now owned by The Type Founders, a private equity-backed entity.
- martin_a 3y ago
  But it seems like Simonson and "The Type Founders" are the same person, too.
  - basch 3y ago
    That could be a misinterpretation. The Type Founders own his company. They own a lot of companies. Im not sure if I make the connection that he owns them all. He is not listed on The Type Founders team. https://thetypefounders.com/#foundries https://thetypefounders.com/#foundries
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
sigzero 3y ago
Reading the Adobe site for the font (https://fonts.adobe.com/fonts/proxima-nova#details-section+proxima-nova-thin https://fonts.adobe.com/fonts/proxima-nova#details-section+p...) it says: The full Adobe Fonts library is cleared for both personal and commercial use. but farther down it says : to purchase additional licensing and services, including: Self Hosting Sooo which is it? I can see how that would be confusing.
- dylan604 3y ago
  Why are you assuming that these are the same? Self-hosting is outside the normal expected use of the service as you are no longer using the service. Once you are self-hosting, they lose all ability to analytics on use of fonts and data about the users. If you take a font from their service as a self-hosted option, you might as well have retrieved the font from some torrent site (at least from their point of view). I have seen several font license that sets limits on the number of uses per month. If you are some small little blog that maybe has 100 visitors a month, then the basic tier is for you. If you are some uber popular site, then you exceed the number allowed by basic tier licensing, and they expect you to pay for a much more expensive license. They can only track this when you do not self-host. We can discuss if we like this or not in another thread, but this is how they are wanting to operate.
fortran77 3y ago
Adobe has really slipped far. They used to be a wonderful company.
multiplegeorges 3y ago
The answer seems pretty straightforward. The web design firm has a license *for their own commercial use*, they do not have a license they can extend their *clients' ongoing commercial use.* You can design a site for your client using Proxima Nova, but your client, as a commercial entity, needs their own license to continue using it in the market as they gain value from its use. Edit: Found this in the Adobe Font Licensing FAQ (https://helpx.adobe.com/fonts/using/font-licensing.html#act-own https://helpx.adobe.com/fonts/using/font-licensing.html#act-...), issue settled: > Does my client need their own font license to use the designs? > No, not if you are creating graphics or documents that have rasterized or properly embedded font data, such as a PDF, JPEG, or PNG. > However, if your client needs to have the font installed to edit your design, they will need their own license, either through a Creative Cloud subscription or as a desktop license purchase. This is clearly a case of the second option.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- Mystery-Machine 3y ago
  No, it is not. It is clearly not. "needs to have the fknt installed to edit your design" is referring to use the font on a computer, through some app. There's no mention of a client using the font on their website.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
- danbruc 3y ago
  The relevant section in the FAQs is the following. Can I use web fonts for my client websites? The Terms of Use do not permit reselling beyond December 31, 2019. After that time, the client's website must load Adobe Fonts from their own Creative Cloud subscription to ensure that there isn't any interruption to the font licensing or web font hosting. In the terms of services it is the following. 3.3 Use of the Licensed Content by Publishers on Whose Behalf You Create Websites. Publishers on whose behalf you create Websites must purchase their own subscription to the Service to continue using and displaying the Licensed Content on their own behalf upon completion of the Website(s) . You may not host the Web Fonts or Web Projects for the Publisher or resell the Service to them. 3.4 Obligations, Limitations, Restrictions, and Prohibited Uses of the Licensed Content. [...] (E) Prohibited Uses of the Licensed Content. Except as may be permitted pursuant to any open source license terms applicable to certain open source components that may be included in or distributed with the Licensed Content, you are expressly prohibited from: (1) hosting the Licensed Content on your own server or other self-hosting option or service; [...] (11) hosting Web Fonts or Web Projects for your own customers or clients, or reselling the Service to them; and The result is the same, the client requires a Creative Cloud subscription. Not sure why they would think what they are doing is allowed, this is neither hard to find nor hard to understand.
propter_hoc 3y ago
I don't get the outrage here. Basically, this Web design company used a proprietary font to make a website for a client, that they then included as a self-hosted font file for the website that they deployed. They only had access to this font through their Creative Cloud SaaS license, which almost certainly doesn't let them take the proprietary IP they have access to and resell it in a package to anyone that pays them. I don't think it's unreasonable of the owner of the IP to ensure that their IP doesn't effectively become freeware just because they signed a bulk license with Adobe. It would be like, because you licensed your song to Spotify for a per-play fee, that would mean anyone can rip it from Spotify and use it in an ad without a license? It also doesn't seem onerous for the web designers to ask their clients to buy a copy of the font that they specified. I've had to do that for websites before.
- ceejayoz 3y ago
  OP states "We have used the font Proxima Nova on a website for our client using the Adobe Web Project method." This method is not self-hosting. If I go click the "add to web project" button, it gives me a `<link rel="stylesheet" href="https://use.typekit.net/foobar.css https://use.typekit.net/foobar.css">` embed to use.
  - MattyMc 3y ago
    Wow, OP is on fire. Sounds like another lawsuit could be coming their way.
- skhr0680 3y ago
  Typefaces aren’t meant to be IP in most countries. So to me, companies rent-seeking on fonts is gross
  - mminer237 3y ago
    Typefaces ≠ fonts This is evidenced by the fact that no one seems willing to clone popular typefaces because making a font is a lot of work even if you have a guide.
parkersweb 3y ago
We were typekit users before it was acquired by Adobe. Creating font kits on behalf of clients for websites that you host was standard practice. It was only last year that I discovered that Adobe has changed the license terms so that it’s no longer permitted. At the same time you can also no longer take out a subscription solely to Adobe fonts - it’s only available as part of a Creative Cloud subscription. So in order to comply with license terms a client has to take out a subscription for an Adobe product e.g Photoshop in order to legally use a font on their website. Any wonder why most designers despaired on hearing of the Figma purchase?
- pavlov 3y ago
  Figma was a VC-funded company. What reason was there to believe they’d do things differently in the long run? It’s like Lucy and the football. Users are the Charlie Browns who will try their luck with proprietary software again and again, only to have it yanked away when inevitably it gets acquired / goes public / merges with an evil ad company (like what happened to Unity) / etc.
- basch 3y ago
  https://helpx.adobe.com/fonts/using/font-licensing.html#web-client https://helpx.adobe.com/fonts/using/font-licensing.html#web-... This is a good example of where it would be beneficial for cloud bundles to behave a little more like medical insurance in the united states. You start with a lower monthly fee, you pay for what you use up to a maximum, and then hit the cap. It lets someone buy a subscription for just one thing like fonts, and then by the time you are using three to four products the suite covers itself. All of that should happen automatically without getting stuck in a subpar tier for year, or being unable to downsize when you stop using a product.
  - parkersweb 3y ago
    It's the weirdness of the fact that the client has to buy a completely unrelated product in order to get the thing they need. Typekit used to cost around £50/year - and allowed agencies to use webfonts on their client sites. Now the clients have to spend £26.50 / month on a product they don't actually need in order to get a font on their website...
eli 3y ago
We switched away from this font because even though we had a lifetime multi-site commercial license from the previous owner of the font, we were constantly getting legal threats from the current owners The Type Founders. Like several times a year we had to put together paperwork to show we could legally use it. I feel like you should have to do some minimum amount of research before demanding a cash settlement from someone.
- jandrese 3y ago
  Why pay for your own lawyers when you can make the other person pay theirs instead? Plus they might decide it is not worth the effort and just settle. It is very rare for companies to be punished for abusing the legal system this way, and usually only after years or decades of flagrant abuse.
  - eli 3y ago
    I have no idea if The Type Founders even designs typefaces. I assume it's staffed with just lawyers and paralegals.
- JimmyRuska 3y ago
  Scammers are sending me geeksquad invoice emails every week. Scammers sent fake invoices to GOOG and META and receive 100m for it [1]. This feels no different, just scan for sites using your font and send invoices frequently whether they have a license or not. It's a very hacker/scammer type of approach to making money, or I guess you could call it a private equity font-industry-vertical 10x secret sauce. https://www.npr.org/2019/03/25/706715377/man-pleads-guilty-to-phishing-scheme-that-fleeced-facebook-google-of-100-million https://www.npr.org/2019/03/25/706715377/man-pleads-guilty-t...
  - eli 3y ago
    That's just straight up fraud. This company demanding payment really does own the font.
    - 3y ago
userbinator 3y ago
Interesting fact: at least in the US, font files themselves can be copyrighted, and thus the exact coordinates of each glyph, but the general shape cannot. You can rasterise a font, trace the result, and turn that back into a vector font file, and change the copyright that way. Hence why there are so many free alternatives of otherwise restrictively licensed fonts, that look identical. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intellectual_property_protection_of_typefaces https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intellectual_property_protecti...
- em-bee 3y ago
  how does that process not end up with the exact same shape as the original? (and if it doesn't, how would that be a useful copy of the font?)
  - bondarchuk 3y ago
    I think the font is seen as (analogous to) a "computer program". You can put the bezier control points in different locations but end up with the same shapes of curves overall. Same result (visually), but created with a different "computer program".
  - mminer237 3y ago
    It does, but it's still a different creative expression. You could legally recreate Microsoft Word pixel-for-pixel and just change the name without copyright issues because the code creating the exact same shapes would have differences and, most importantly, not be a literal copy but a recreation.
- heavyset_go 3y ago
  You might be covered for copyright claims, but it sounds like you wouldn't necessarily be in the clear when it comes to design patent infringement claims.
adeel_siddiqui 3y ago
Adobe provides adding fonts from their CDN and they are hosting Proxima Nova: https://fonts.adobe.com/search?query=Proxima%2Bnova https://fonts.adobe.com/search?query=Proxima%2Bnova. Looks like OP is using it from Adobe's CDN and now their client is being chased by the owner of the font. Wonder if Adobe is not paying (any/appropriate) licensing fees to the owner of the font?
KronisLV 3y ago
Call me a bit utilitarian or risk averse, but to me it seems that the free fonts out there cover basically all of the use cases that I could have. Surely there are enough fonts like that to fit most of the designs that you could conceivably come up with? Or do people really look at a font that might cost thousands of USD to use, like Proxima Nova (https://www.marksimonson.com/fonts/view/proxima-nova https://www.marksimonson.com/fonts/view/proxima-nova) and go: "Yes, this is exactly what fits my creative vision and nothing less will do!" Not that it wouldn't be worth the price tag for some, but to me that feels like something that only large enterprises for which that's a rounding error might want to do.
- seabass-labrax 3y ago
  I think it's more that the convenience of Adobe's library of proprietary fonts is appealing to (and relatively inexpensive for) most designers. In my opinion, anything longer than a slogan will probably benefit from the tried-and-tested nature of pedestrian typefaces, and is not the right place for excessive design flair. Nonetheless, it is not trivial to install and manage fonts, nor to understand the licensing obligations of free fonts.
- avereveard 3y ago
  depends, if you want a consistent font across a website it's hard with free fonts, because these usually come in bold/regular/italic and that's it, professional font will come with all combinations with wide and narrow lettering on top, plus light and black, so it will cover everything from titles to footers, with a good coverage of unicode glyphs on top of it. the free ones that come close, like the dejavu font family, are very few and overused.
  - marcosdumay 3y ago
    There is one reply to the same comment as yours with a free font that looks pretty much like this one that has about 3 times as many styles as it. And all of them look fine.
    - 3y ago
Mystery-Machine 3y ago
I love Adobe. They just keep f*king people over and over again and people still use their products. This is like Microsoft a few decades ago. The only Adobe product that I still use is Figma. Everything else I refuse to use when being asked to.
- agloe_dreams 3y ago
  In fairness, this seems like it isn't Adobe's fault. The designer of the font created a PE firm that only sues people for using it under changed terms of their choosing.
  - basch 3y ago
    Quite frankly, it sounds like it is Adobe's fault for having a completely useless support structure. The first support person to answer the phone should have been able to deliver this url https://helpx.adobe.com/fonts/using/font-licensing.html#web-client https://helpx.adobe.com/fonts/using/font-licensing.html#web-... and told them that their client needs to buy a creative suite license to solve the problem. I get that OP didn't manage to find the answer to their question in the FAQ, but tier 1 support basically exists to direct people to the FAQ answer they are looking for. Instead Adobe paid for at least 13 support calls of labor. Which from the employee standpoint seems to suggest that head count can be justified just by providing a worse service.
stilley2 3y ago
I received a similar email from Type Founders despite the fact that my website does not provide or even specify a specific font to use (besides things like size and sand serif). I got the impression it was either a shakedown or a very broadly aimed and poorly executed attempt to recovering licensing fees.
zxcvbnm 3y ago
Uhm so why not not-use that font, and switch to another mainstream one? Who cares, it's just a font? Or is it heresy to ask this?
adolph 3y ago
Didn't we already do this with desktop software and stock images ages ago? Speculatively a comment on the Adobe says that The Type Founders is private equity backed. That makes sense if they are trying to capture revenue that has been forgone out of license management difficulties. Once they prove the legalities and revenue stream, sell it to Adobe or IPO. Nobody likes to hear it, but I think there is an opportunity for blockchain here. Like any piece of software, fonts are licensed for specific uses. The kind of license you need is determined by how you will be using the fonts and what you will be using them to create. [...] A web license lets you serve the fonts on a website and use them as live, dynamic text via HTML and @font-face CSS. The cost is determined by the specific fonts licensed, the approximate number of monthly page views the websites using the fonts receive, and the length of the license in years. https://www.marksimonson.com/info/purchasing https://www.marksimonson.com/info/purchasing
mattzito 3y ago
Font/typeface licensing and IP is a nightmare. Typefaces cannot be copyrighted, but fonts can. As a practical matter, this means that representations of typefaces in rendered documents can be redistributed freely - but the font file can be copyrighted, which means that anything that loads the font file (e.g. your website) has to have a license to use the font. So - if this font was being used in just a few places, they could easily convert that text to images and be fully compliant (though obviously hacky). However, since they're loading it as a web font, now they have to pay. It gets weirder when you talk about productivity software - lots of companies believe that they "own" their fonts, and hence can use them in their documents with impunity. In reality, they likely have an unlimited organization usage license, which allows them to install the font files on every computer in the organization, but not to distribute them outside of their organization. Have a design agency that you hire to build slide decks for the sales team? They need to buy a license to use that font (or you buy it for them). This also creates a reason to distribute documents in rendered form - wonder why that marketing deck got emailed to you from a vendor as a PDF instead of the PPT? If it uses a licensed font, you probably don't have a license and consequently won't have the font file installed on your computer, which causes the document to fall back to an alternate font (with mixed results) This is often true even when the font was custom-designed for a particular company - if it's a custom version of an existing font, the foundry typically creates a one off license for that customer. This is also why Google Docs and Slides can't support custom fonts - in their model, the fonts are delivered over the browser, so there's no way to limit distribution of documents with those fonts to remain in compliance with the foundry licensing. (Disclosure: I'm a googler, I worked on google slides years ago, got a ton of requests for custom fonts, out of 30+ companies that asked for this, only two owned their fonts in such a way that they could actually be distributed without limits).
hnisforfascists 3y ago
[dead]
thetypefounders 3y ago
Hello from The Type Founders! We are posting our message that we shared on the Adobe forum here, too, to ensure anyone with questions or concerns can see it. We wanted to take this opportunity to offer our thoughts here. The Type Founders (or TTF) launched in 2021 and our mission is to develop an extensive library of high-quality, distinctive, and usable typefaces. We are a small team of individuals who love all things typographic and have dedicated our careers to advancing the interests of type designers and all users of type. Underneath the TTF umbrella are 27 type foundry brands and a library of 7,000+ fonts, many of which are available on Adobe Fonts. The vast majority of type designers behind these foundries remain actively involved, drawing and publishing new fonts. As custodians of these legacies and the craft, it is our business to work with those designers to help their typefaces flourish. One aspect of that is ensuring that their work is properly licensed. The discipline of type design is uniquely positioned at the intersection of art, history, culture, and engineering. As new technologies and content platforms take hold — such as dynamic websites, mobile apps, and streaming platforms — font software and licensing have evolved from the days of buying a case of wood type to receiving a CD with a couple hundred fonts to downloading files onto your computer or accessing them directly from the cloud. This inevitably leads to some confusion about what is and is not covered by certain licenses, especially as no common license exists in our industry — a topic we spend a great deal talking about at font conferences (yes, those are actually a thing!). With Adobe Fonts, Adobe has built an amazing service for Creative Cloud subscribers, and we are lucky to be one of their partners. The Adobe Fonts library has thousands of great typefaces for any project and the service is easy to use and seamlessly integrates into Adobe apps. The font license included is straightforward, but there are a few nuances, which likely explains the confusion and frustration on this thread and why our representatives may have reached out to you to verify licensing for one of our fonts. After this letter, we will address those points specifically. Developing well-crafted typefaces requires years of training — including specialized design and technical skills — and often involves collaboration with other designers and engineers. We understand that receiving an email telling you that you are in the wrong or asking you to purchase a license for something you thought you already owned may be frustrating but unfortunately type designers are not fairly compensated for their work if their fonts are not properly licensed, including how fonts on Adobe Fonts are used. As mentioned above, the TTF team cares deeply about type design and typography and are here to answer any questions you might have about Adobe Fonts, font licensing in general, or anything at all related to type. Don’t hesitate to reach out at any time: info@thetypefounders.com. Thank you from the TTF team! — Aaron, Bram, Dan, Ivan, Jill, Marina, Paley, Richard, Sam, and Tiffany = = = = = = = = = To address some of the questions raised on the Adobe thread, any font on Adobe Fonts can be used for personal and commercial projects, with a few exceptions, as outlined in Adobe’s font licensing FAQ (https://helpx.adobe.com/fonts/using/font-licensing.html https://helpx.adobe.com/fonts/using/font-licensing.html). This includes using the fonts on websites as long as you follow Adobe’s instructions (https://helpx.adobe.com/fonts/using/add-fonts-website.html https://helpx.adobe.com/fonts/using/add-fonts-website.html). In practical terms, for web use via Adobe Fonts, this means: 1. You need to use the Adobe Fonts web font hosting service (or CDN) to serve the fonts to your website. 2. If you want to host the font files on your website or your client’s website, you would need to purchase a license that grants that right (generally called a “self-hosted” web license) and use the web font files provided by the licensor, which would be WOFF and WOFF2 files, not OTFs and TTFs, which are desktop file formats. 3. Any client or third party needs their own Adobe Fonts license via Creative Cloud to serve fonts to their website (https://helpx.adobe.com/fonts/using/font-licensing.html#web-client https://helpx.adobe.com/fonts/using/font-licensing.html#web-...) — or they can purchase a web license directly from the foundry or authorized reseller. There are a couple of issues we wanted to clarify, too, related to @Bobby Henderson’s comments: “Many businesses and organizations who hire web designers and developers to build web sites are not going to be doing the web hosting work themselves.” This is not accurate; millions of business websites self-host their web fonts and modern website building tools have made this much easier than in the past. If anyone has questions about self-hosting web fonts, please send us an email as we are happy to help! 2. “If my graphic design clients had to buy font files they don’t need simply because I used them in a design project they would be pretty upset.” The Adobe Fonts license — and virtually every other font license — allows you to create artwork or other assets on behalf of your client. As long as you only share the final graphics, your client would not need to purchase a font license. If your client needs to edit the graphics or otherwise use the fonts, they would need to have their own Creative Cloud subscription or purchase a license to use the font.

107 points by mcenedella 3y ago

RobotToaster 3y ago

It's not even a particularly nice font, it looks rather corporate memphis.

agloe_dreams 3y ago
It was viral for a period in the early 2010s, a kinda mix between a Grotesk (like helvetica) and Futura. Kinda like Helvetica for those who wanted more 'feeling'. But it's a bit stale by now TBH.

2Gkashmiri 3y ago

i dream that an overworked, tired patent/copyright troll sends me a threatening legal notice for using something stupid like fonts or a a css class or a color hue ala pantone colors in a website of mine which threatens me with financial ruin by implicating me using DMCA or some american legislation..... i just want to experience this. i don't have a legal notice fetish if that is what you are thinking, i just... want to see a stupid letter threatening me which i can laugh off. remember TBP people had a public page many many years ago which had DMCA notices and their replies. That.....

eli 3y ago
I don't think it's an empty threat. What's your plan for when they sue you?
- 2Gkashmiri 3y ago
  uh,,, not live in the US for starters?
ceejayoz 3y ago
TBP laughed it off, but they still went to jail. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Pirate_Bay_trial https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Pirate_Bay_trial
- realusername 3y ago
  With a dubious procedure, the trial was a farce. Lawyers aren't going to help when the judges themselves are corrupted.
siva7 3y ago
be careful what you wish for
anon____ 3y ago
Put the Free Speech Flag on your website. Its colors represent an illegal number. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_Speech_Flag https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_Speech_Flag https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illegal_number https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illegal_number
DrawTR 3y ago
> i just... want to see a stupid letter threatening me which i can laugh off. Are you familiar with the UK's TV licensing notices? Those are really funny
__MatrixMan__ 3y ago
Surely there's a better way to maximize the amount of these people's time you're wasting than to merely use the font and laugh when they send you a letter that you intend to ignore. Like perhaps we compromise a site and switch the font so that they sue our target. I'm not sure what that target should be. Either another group of trolls that the world would be better off without, or we bait them into a fight they can't win. Get them to sue their own law firm or something.
- RobotToaster 3y ago
  Somehow switching the font on Oracle's site would be fun.
  - masfuerte 3y ago
    While sneaking an Oracle database instance into Adobe's backend.
    - __MatrixMan__ 3y ago
      As much as I'd enjoy watching Oracle and Adobe tear each other apart, we have to make sure that https://thetypefounders.com/ https://thetypefounders.com/ goes down with them. Presumably they have some kind of credentials with adobe? We need to frame them for the hacks (this development only to surface after Oracle and Adobe have sunk millions into this). To manufacture a motive, we can plant evidence that whatever bunch of lawyers is behind the harassment believed that they could also make money from Oracle v Adobe.
GuB-42 3y ago
> a color hue ala pantone colors Pantone don't own colors, what they own is the relationship between the name they have given and the color it represents. So you can use the RGB representation of Pantone colors, no problem. You can also say "the logo color is Pantone XYZ". What you are not allowed to do is, for example, make an image processing tool that converts between Pantone color names and RGB values. And even that is debated. Pantone is a color matching service. The idea is that you can say "use Pantone XYZ" and you know exactly how it will look like everywhere, be it on screen, in print, or as a plastic part, and Pantone business is to sell reference material that helps ensuring it is the case. And you can't use Pantone on the web anyways, browsers don't support it (because they don't have a license), you will have to use RGB values or whatever CSS supports.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- 2Gkashmiri 3y ago
  just humor me, what if we create a color matching service that actually does nothing but "shows" that it does work. it doesn't actually have to work, only get the pantone lawyers all excited

tyingq 3y ago

I hadn't looked at the business model for fonts for a while. Looking at https://store.typenetwork.com/ https://store.typenetwork.com/ , each style of Proxima Nova (regular, bold, italic, etc) is priced à la carte, and for web use you can't really buy it, you rent it. Up to $1,015.00/year if you have 2.5M views/month. Edit: Shared not because it's particularly relevant for the legal aspects, just for some relative idea of what it would cost if you did pay for a license from the party that's unhappy.

ceejayoz 3y ago
Here, though, the OP is using Adobe Fonts. https://fonts.adobe.com/fonts/proxima-nova https://fonts.adobe.com/fonts/proxima-nova > Licensing Information > The full Adobe Fonts library is cleared for both personal and commercial use. > As with everything from Adobe Fonts, you can use these fonts for: ... Website Publishing: Create a Web Project to add any font from our service to your website Either Adobe has a license, and the foundry is fucking up, or Adobe doesn't have a license, and Adobe has fucked up. In neither case should this be OP's problem.
- sbarre 3y ago
  At least as far back as 2018 there's also a distinction between using the font when designing website assets that will be graphics like JPEGs or PNGs, vs embedding the font files themselves to use for the text elements of the website. Agencies used to get in trouble all the time back in the day for embedding font files in client websites that they had only licensed for offline use in Illustration/Photoshop/etc.
- jfk13 3y ago
  > Website Publishing: Create a Web Project to add any font from our service to your website It doesn't say "...add any font from our service to websites for your clients", though.
  - LordAtlas 3y ago
    It seems to me that the client would need a Creative Cloud subscription of their own to serve the fonts for their website.

drcongo 3y ago

Adobe gonna Adobe.

bondarchuk 3y ago

Ah, there we have it (a few comments down): >Simonson designed Proxima Nova, his fonts now owned by The Type Founders, a private equity-backed entity.

martin_a 3y ago
But it seems like Simonson and "The Type Founders" are the same person, too.
- basch 3y ago
  That could be a misinterpretation. The Type Founders own his company. They own a lot of companies. Im not sure if I make the connection that he owns them all. He is not listed on The Type Founders team. https://thetypefounders.com/#foundries https://thetypefounders.com/#foundries
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]

sigzero 3y ago

Reading the Adobe site for the font (https://fonts.adobe.com/fonts/proxima-nova#details-section+proxima-nova-thin https://fonts.adobe.com/fonts/proxima-nova#details-section+p...) it says: The full Adobe Fonts library is cleared for both personal and commercial use. but farther down it says : to purchase additional licensing and services, including: Self Hosting Sooo which is it? I can see how that would be confusing.

dylan604 3y ago
Why are you assuming that these are the same? Self-hosting is outside the normal expected use of the service as you are no longer using the service. Once you are self-hosting, they lose all ability to analytics on use of fonts and data about the users. If you take a font from their service as a self-hosted option, you might as well have retrieved the font from some torrent site (at least from their point of view). I have seen several font license that sets limits on the number of uses per month. If you are some small little blog that maybe has 100 visitors a month, then the basic tier is for you. If you are some uber popular site, then you exceed the number allowed by basic tier licensing, and they expect you to pay for a much more expensive license. They can only track this when you do not self-host. We can discuss if we like this or not in another thread, but this is how they are wanting to operate.

fortran77 3y ago

Adobe has really slipped far. They used to be a wonderful company.

multiplegeorges 3y ago

The answer seems pretty straightforward. The web design firm has a license *for their own commercial use*, they do not have a license they can extend their *clients' ongoing commercial use.* You can design a site for your client using Proxima Nova, but your client, as a commercial entity, needs their own license to continue using it in the market as they gain value from its use. Edit: Found this in the Adobe Font Licensing FAQ (https://helpx.adobe.com/fonts/using/font-licensing.html#act-own https://helpx.adobe.com/fonts/using/font-licensing.html#act-...), issue settled: > Does my client need their own font license to use the designs? > No, not if you are creating graphics or documents that have rasterized or properly embedded font data, such as a PDF, JPEG, or PNG. > However, if your client needs to have the font installed to edit your design, they will need their own license, either through a Creative Cloud subscription or as a desktop license purchase. This is clearly a case of the second option.

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
Mystery-Machine 3y ago
No, it is not. It is clearly not. "needs to have the fknt installed to edit your design" is referring to use the font on a computer, through some app. There's no mention of a client using the font on their website.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
danbruc 3y ago
The relevant section in the FAQs is the following. Can I use web fonts for my client websites? The Terms of Use do not permit reselling beyond December 31, 2019. After that time, the client's website must load Adobe Fonts from their own Creative Cloud subscription to ensure that there isn't any interruption to the font licensing or web font hosting. In the terms of services it is the following. 3.3 Use of the Licensed Content by Publishers on Whose Behalf You Create Websites. Publishers on whose behalf you create Websites must purchase their own subscription to the Service to continue using and displaying the Licensed Content on their own behalf upon completion of the Website(s) . You may not host the Web Fonts or Web Projects for the Publisher or resell the Service to them. 3.4 Obligations, Limitations, Restrictions, and Prohibited Uses of the Licensed Content. [...] (E) Prohibited Uses of the Licensed Content. Except as may be permitted pursuant to any open source license terms applicable to certain open source components that may be included in or distributed with the Licensed Content, you are expressly prohibited from: (1) hosting the Licensed Content on your own server or other self-hosting option or service; [...] (11) hosting Web Fonts or Web Projects for your own customers or clients, or reselling the Service to them; and The result is the same, the client requires a Creative Cloud subscription. Not sure why they would think what they are doing is allowed, this is neither hard to find nor hard to understand.

propter_hoc 3y ago

I don't get the outrage here. Basically, this Web design company used a proprietary font to make a website for a client, that they then included as a self-hosted font file for the website that they deployed. They only had access to this font through their Creative Cloud SaaS license, which almost certainly doesn't let them take the proprietary IP they have access to and resell it in a package to anyone that pays them. I don't think it's unreasonable of the owner of the IP to ensure that their IP doesn't effectively become freeware just because they signed a bulk license with Adobe. It would be like, because you licensed your song to Spotify for a per-play fee, that would mean anyone can rip it from Spotify and use it in an ad without a license? It also doesn't seem onerous for the web designers to ask their clients to buy a copy of the font that they specified. I've had to do that for websites before.

ceejayoz 3y ago
OP states "We have used the font Proxima Nova on a website for our client using the Adobe Web Project method." This method is not self-hosting. If I go click the "add to web project" button, it gives me a `<link rel="stylesheet" href="https://use.typekit.net/foobar.css https://use.typekit.net/foobar.css">` embed to use.
- MattyMc 3y ago
  Wow, OP is on fire. Sounds like another lawsuit could be coming their way.
skhr0680 3y ago
Typefaces aren’t meant to be IP in most countries. So to me, companies rent-seeking on fonts is gross
- mminer237 3y ago
  Typefaces ≠ fonts This is evidenced by the fact that no one seems willing to clone popular typefaces because making a font is a lot of work even if you have a guide.

parkersweb 3y ago

We were typekit users before it was acquired by Adobe. Creating font kits on behalf of clients for websites that you host was standard practice. It was only last year that I discovered that Adobe has changed the license terms so that it’s no longer permitted. At the same time you can also no longer take out a subscription solely to Adobe fonts - it’s only available as part of a Creative Cloud subscription. So in order to comply with license terms a client has to take out a subscription for an Adobe product e.g Photoshop in order to legally use a font on their website. Any wonder why most designers despaired on hearing of the Figma purchase?

pavlov 3y ago
Figma was a VC-funded company. What reason was there to believe they’d do things differently in the long run? It’s like Lucy and the football. Users are the Charlie Browns who will try their luck with proprietary software again and again, only to have it yanked away when inevitably it gets acquired / goes public / merges with an evil ad company (like what happened to Unity) / etc.
basch 3y ago
https://helpx.adobe.com/fonts/using/font-licensing.html#web-client https://helpx.adobe.com/fonts/using/font-licensing.html#web-... This is a good example of where it would be beneficial for cloud bundles to behave a little more like medical insurance in the united states. You start with a lower monthly fee, you pay for what you use up to a maximum, and then hit the cap. It lets someone buy a subscription for just one thing like fonts, and then by the time you are using three to four products the suite covers itself. All of that should happen automatically without getting stuck in a subpar tier for year, or being unable to downsize when you stop using a product.
- parkersweb 3y ago
  It's the weirdness of the fact that the client has to buy a completely unrelated product in order to get the thing they need. Typekit used to cost around £50/year - and allowed agencies to use webfonts on their client sites. Now the clients have to spend £26.50 / month on a product they don't actually need in order to get a font on their website...

eli 3y ago

We switched away from this font because even though we had a lifetime multi-site commercial license from the previous owner of the font, we were constantly getting legal threats from the current owners The Type Founders. Like several times a year we had to put together paperwork to show we could legally use it. I feel like you should have to do some minimum amount of research before demanding a cash settlement from someone.

jandrese 3y ago
Why pay for your own lawyers when you can make the other person pay theirs instead? Plus they might decide it is not worth the effort and just settle. It is very rare for companies to be punished for abusing the legal system this way, and usually only after years or decades of flagrant abuse.
- eli 3y ago
  I have no idea if The Type Founders even designs typefaces. I assume it's staffed with just lawyers and paralegals.
JimmyRuska 3y ago
Scammers are sending me geeksquad invoice emails every week. Scammers sent fake invoices to GOOG and META and receive 100m for it [1]. This feels no different, just scan for sites using your font and send invoices frequently whether they have a license or not. It's a very hacker/scammer type of approach to making money, or I guess you could call it a private equity font-industry-vertical 10x secret sauce. https://www.npr.org/2019/03/25/706715377/man-pleads-guilty-to-phishing-scheme-that-fleeced-facebook-google-of-100-million https://www.npr.org/2019/03/25/706715377/man-pleads-guilty-t...
- eli 3y ago
  That's just straight up fraud. This company demanding payment really does own the font.
  - 3y ago

userbinator 3y ago

Interesting fact: at least in the US, font files themselves can be copyrighted, and thus the exact coordinates of each glyph, but the general shape cannot. You can rasterise a font, trace the result, and turn that back into a vector font file, and change the copyright that way. Hence why there are so many free alternatives of otherwise restrictively licensed fonts, that look identical. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intellectual_property_protection_of_typefaces https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intellectual_property_protecti...

em-bee 3y ago
how does that process not end up with the exact same shape as the original? (and if it doesn't, how would that be a useful copy of the font?)
- bondarchuk 3y ago
  I think the font is seen as (analogous to) a "computer program". You can put the bezier control points in different locations but end up with the same shapes of curves overall. Same result (visually), but created with a different "computer program".
- mminer237 3y ago
  It does, but it's still a different creative expression. You could legally recreate Microsoft Word pixel-for-pixel and just change the name without copyright issues because the code creating the exact same shapes would have differences and, most importantly, not be a literal copy but a recreation.
heavyset_go 3y ago
You might be covered for copyright claims, but it sounds like you wouldn't necessarily be in the clear when it comes to design patent infringement claims.

adeel_siddiqui 3y ago

Adobe provides adding fonts from their CDN and they are hosting Proxima Nova: https://fonts.adobe.com/search?query=Proxima%2Bnova https://fonts.adobe.com/search?query=Proxima%2Bnova. Looks like OP is using it from Adobe's CDN and now their client is being chased by the owner of the font. Wonder if Adobe is not paying (any/appropriate) licensing fees to the owner of the font?

KronisLV 3y ago

Call me a bit utilitarian or risk averse, but to me it seems that the free fonts out there cover basically all of the use cases that I could have. Surely there are enough fonts like that to fit most of the designs that you could conceivably come up with? Or do people really look at a font that might cost thousands of USD to use, like Proxima Nova (https://www.marksimonson.com/fonts/view/proxima-nova https://www.marksimonson.com/fonts/view/proxima-nova) and go: "Yes, this is exactly what fits my creative vision and nothing less will do!" Not that it wouldn't be worth the price tag for some, but to me that feels like something that only large enterprises for which that's a rounding error might want to do.

seabass-labrax 3y ago
I think it's more that the convenience of Adobe's library of proprietary fonts is appealing to (and relatively inexpensive for) most designers. In my opinion, anything longer than a slogan will probably benefit from the tried-and-tested nature of pedestrian typefaces, and is not the right place for excessive design flair. Nonetheless, it is not trivial to install and manage fonts, nor to understand the licensing obligations of free fonts.
avereveard 3y ago
depends, if you want a consistent font across a website it's hard with free fonts, because these usually come in bold/regular/italic and that's it, professional font will come with all combinations with wide and narrow lettering on top, plus light and black, so it will cover everything from titles to footers, with a good coverage of unicode glyphs on top of it. the free ones that come close, like the dejavu font family, are very few and overused.
- marcosdumay 3y ago
  There is one reply to the same comment as yours with a free font that looks pretty much like this one that has about 3 times as many styles as it. And all of them look fine.
  - 3y ago

Mystery-Machine 3y ago

I love Adobe. They just keep f*king people over and over again and people still use their products. This is like Microsoft a few decades ago. The only Adobe product that I still use is Figma. Everything else I refuse to use when being asked to.

agloe_dreams 3y ago
In fairness, this seems like it isn't Adobe's fault. The designer of the font created a PE firm that only sues people for using it under changed terms of their choosing.
- basch 3y ago
  Quite frankly, it sounds like it is Adobe's fault for having a completely useless support structure. The first support person to answer the phone should have been able to deliver this url https://helpx.adobe.com/fonts/using/font-licensing.html#web-client https://helpx.adobe.com/fonts/using/font-licensing.html#web-... and told them that their client needs to buy a creative suite license to solve the problem. I get that OP didn't manage to find the answer to their question in the FAQ, but tier 1 support basically exists to direct people to the FAQ answer they are looking for. Instead Adobe paid for at least 13 support calls of labor. Which from the employee standpoint seems to suggest that head count can be justified just by providing a worse service.

stilley2 3y ago

I received a similar email from Type Founders despite the fact that my website does not provide or even specify a specific font to use (besides things like size and sand serif). I got the impression it was either a shakedown or a very broadly aimed and poorly executed attempt to recovering licensing fees.

zxcvbnm 3y ago

Uhm so why not not-use that font, and switch to another mainstream one? Who cares, it's just a font? Or is it heresy to ask this?

adolph 3y ago

Didn't we already do this with desktop software and stock images ages ago? Speculatively a comment on the Adobe says that The Type Founders is private equity backed. That makes sense if they are trying to capture revenue that has been forgone out of license management difficulties. Once they prove the legalities and revenue stream, sell it to Adobe or IPO. Nobody likes to hear it, but I think there is an opportunity for blockchain here. Like any piece of software, fonts are licensed for specific uses. The kind of license you need is determined by how you will be using the fonts and what you will be using them to create. [...] A web license lets you serve the fonts on a website and use them as live, dynamic text via HTML and @font-face CSS. The cost is determined by the specific fonts licensed, the approximate number of monthly page views the websites using the fonts receive, and the length of the license in years. https://www.marksimonson.com/info/purchasing https://www.marksimonson.com/info/purchasing

mattzito 3y ago

Font/typeface licensing and IP is a nightmare. Typefaces cannot be copyrighted, but fonts can. As a practical matter, this means that representations of typefaces in rendered documents can be redistributed freely - but the font file can be copyrighted, which means that anything that loads the font file (e.g. your website) has to have a license to use the font. So - if this font was being used in just a few places, they could easily convert that text to images and be fully compliant (though obviously hacky). However, since they're loading it as a web font, now they have to pay. It gets weirder when you talk about productivity software - lots of companies believe that they "own" their fonts, and hence can use them in their documents with impunity. In reality, they likely have an unlimited organization usage license, which allows them to install the font files on every computer in the organization, but not to distribute them outside of their organization. Have a design agency that you hire to build slide decks for the sales team? They need to buy a license to use that font (or you buy it for them). This also creates a reason to distribute documents in rendered form - wonder why that marketing deck got emailed to you from a vendor as a PDF instead of the PPT? If it uses a licensed font, you probably don't have a license and consequently won't have the font file installed on your computer, which causes the document to fall back to an alternate font (with mixed results) This is often true even when the font was custom-designed for a particular company - if it's a custom version of an existing font, the foundry typically creates a one off license for that customer. This is also why Google Docs and Slides can't support custom fonts - in their model, the fonts are delivered over the browser, so there's no way to limit distribution of documents with those fonts to remain in compliance with the foundry licensing. (Disclosure: I'm a googler, I worked on google slides years ago, got a ton of requests for custom fonts, out of 30+ companies that asked for this, only two owned their fonts in such a way that they could actually be distributed without limits).

hnisforfascists 3y ago

[dead]

thetypefounders 3y ago

Hello from The Type Founders! We are posting our message that we shared on the Adobe forum here, too, to ensure anyone with questions or concerns can see it. We wanted to take this opportunity to offer our thoughts here. The Type Founders (or TTF) launched in 2021 and our mission is to develop an extensive library of high-quality, distinctive, and usable typefaces. We are a small team of individuals who love all things typographic and have dedicated our careers to advancing the interests of type designers and all users of type. Underneath the TTF umbrella are 27 type foundry brands and a library of 7,000+ fonts, many of which are available on Adobe Fonts. The vast majority of type designers behind these foundries remain actively involved, drawing and publishing new fonts. As custodians of these legacies and the craft, it is our business to work with those designers to help their typefaces flourish. One aspect of that is ensuring that their work is properly licensed. The discipline of type design is uniquely positioned at the intersection of art, history, culture, and engineering. As new technologies and content platforms take hold — such as dynamic websites, mobile apps, and streaming platforms — font software and licensing have evolved from the days of buying a case of wood type to receiving a CD with a couple hundred fonts to downloading files onto your computer or accessing them directly from the cloud. This inevitably leads to some confusion about what is and is not covered by certain licenses, especially as no common license exists in our industry — a topic we spend a great deal talking about at font conferences (yes, those are actually a thing!). With Adobe Fonts, Adobe has built an amazing service for Creative Cloud subscribers, and we are lucky to be one of their partners. The Adobe Fonts library has thousands of great typefaces for any project and the service is easy to use and seamlessly integrates into Adobe apps. The font license included is straightforward, but there are a few nuances, which likely explains the confusion and frustration on this thread and why our representatives may have reached out to you to verify licensing for one of our fonts. After this letter, we will address those points specifically. Developing well-crafted typefaces requires years of training — including specialized design and technical skills — and often involves collaboration with other designers and engineers. We understand that receiving an email telling you that you are in the wrong or asking you to purchase a license for something you thought you already owned may be frustrating but unfortunately type designers are not fairly compensated for their work if their fonts are not properly licensed, including how fonts on Adobe Fonts are used. As mentioned above, the TTF team cares deeply about type design and typography and are here to answer any questions you might have about Adobe Fonts, font licensing in general, or anything at all related to type. Don’t hesitate to reach out at any time: info@thetypefounders.com. Thank you from the TTF team! — Aaron, Bram, Dan, Ivan, Jill, Marina, Paley, Richard, Sam, and Tiffany = = = = = = = = = To address some of the questions raised on the Adobe thread, any font on Adobe Fonts can be used for personal and commercial projects, with a few exceptions, as outlined in Adobe’s font licensing FAQ (https://helpx.adobe.com/fonts/using/font-licensing.html https://helpx.adobe.com/fonts/using/font-licensing.html). This includes using the fonts on websites as long as you follow Adobe’s instructions (https://helpx.adobe.com/fonts/using/add-fonts-website.html https://helpx.adobe.com/fonts/using/add-fonts-website.html). In practical terms, for web use via Adobe Fonts, this means: 1. You need to use the Adobe Fonts web font hosting service (or CDN) to serve the fonts to your website. 2. If you want to host the font files on your website or your client’s website, you would need to purchase a license that grants that right (generally called a “self-hosted” web license) and use the web font files provided by the licensor, which would be WOFF and WOFF2 files, not OTFs and TTFs, which are desktop file formats. 3. Any client or third party needs their own Adobe Fonts license via Creative Cloud to serve fonts to their website (https://helpx.adobe.com/fonts/using/font-licensing.html#web-client https://helpx.adobe.com/fonts/using/font-licensing.html#web-...) — or they can purchase a web license directly from the foundry or authorized reseller. There are a couple of issues we wanted to clarify, too, related to @Bobby Henderson’s comments: “Many businesses and organizations who hire web designers and developers to build web sites are not going to be doing the web hosting work themselves.” This is not accurate; millions of business websites self-host their web fonts and modern website building tools have made this much easier than in the past. If anyone has questions about self-hosting web fonts, please send us an email as we are happy to help! 2. “If my graphic design clients had to buy font files they don’t need simply because I used them in a design project they would be pretty upset.” The Adobe Fonts license — and virtually every other font license — allows you to create artwork or other assets on behalf of your client. As long as you only share the final graphics, your client would not need to purchase a font license. If your client needs to edit the graphics or otherwise use the fonts, they would need to have their own Creative Cloud subscription or purchase a license to use the font.