3 ms·
> Typefaces ≠ fonts I always get angry about "x but on a computer" patents, and the "typefaces ... but on a computer" court case lights a similar fire in my be
by skhr0680 3y ago
> Typefaces ≠ fonts
I always get angry about "x but on a computer" patents, and the "typefaces ... but on a computer" court case lights a similar fire in my belly.
> 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.
The 1,000,000 Helvetica clones out there disagree with this statement
- mminer237 3y agoUnlike a patent, a copyright only protects a specific expression. There's nothing stopping you from using said typeface on a computer. If it's so easy to clone, why not just clone Proxima Nova and be in the clear? What exactly is copyright law stopping people from doing? It's literally only protecting their work in the font. If they did a lot of work, you can't call selling it "rent-seeking" and surely it's worth protecting and incentivizing. If they did little work, then little is protected. Anybody can use it by doing an even smaller amount of work.