[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kde-licensing
Subject:    Re: Oxygen font licensing
From:       Dave Crossland <dave () lab6 ! com>
Date:       2012-01-26 22:37:54
Message-ID: CAEozd0yZusc6HG22o+fvy6VB30U5f1bpp38AaQxkSyy8ndaOWg () mail ! gmail ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

Hi,

On 26 January 2012 14:19, Arne Babenhauserheide <arne_bab@web.de> wrote:
> At Wed, 25 Jan 2012 08:47:08 -0800, Dave Crossland wrote:
>> On 25 January 2012 08:16, Dave Crossland <dave@lab6.com> wrote:
>> > Arne Babenhauserheide <arne_bab@web.de> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> The problem is that the OFL might not extend to the GPL text,
>> >> but the GPL text could well extend to the font. Which in my opinion
>> >> also is how it should be: If there were an unfree font in a PDF, I
>> >> might not be able to distribute changed versions of the text in
>> >> the same format, because I would not be allowed to redistribute
>> >> the font.
>>
>> If true, it would also be true of images/graphics that are also
>> embedded in PDFs with GPL texts. How are non-free images used with GPL
>> texts handled?
>
> In my case: Not at all.

Fair enough :-)

However, Richard wrote:

On 25/01/12 15:00, Richard Stallman wrote:
>    It seems reasonable to argue that the text and the font are two
>    separate works even if packaged into a PDF file.  A text and a font
>    seem separate by nature -- not like two program modules that are
>    combined into one program.

GPLv3 says Corresponding Source "does not include the work's System
Libraries, or general-purpose tools or **generally available free
programs which are used unmodified** in performing those activities
but which are not part of the work" This seems absolutely explicit
that when an unmodified OFL font is distributed with a GPLv3 program,
it is okay.

However, the GPLv2 says "the source code distributed need not include
anything that is normally distributed (in either source or binary
form) with the major components (compiler, kernel, and so on) of the
operating system on which the executable runs, unless that component
itself accompanies the executable." and this would appear to mean
non-GPL fonts may not be okay if they can not be considered separate
works.

As RMS suggests, I think they can reasonably be considered separate
works - since any other font could be substituted and your roleplaying
program would function the same - indeed, font substitution may be
done by the OS without your roleplaying program knowing about it - so
it seems to me that even proprietary fonts are not subject to the GPL
copyleft.

Cheers
Dave
_______________________________________________
Kde-licensing mailing list
Kde-licensing@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-licensing
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]