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

List:       kde-licensing
Subject:    Re: Oxygen font licensing
From:       vernon adams <vern () newtypography ! co ! uk>
Date:       2012-01-28 12:07:41
Message-ID: 4F23E50D.7060307 () newtypography ! co ! uk
[Download RAW message or body]

As the designer of the fonts, and after much thought, my preference is 
that the fonts should be dual licensed, both under GPL and the 
OFL(OpenFontLicense). This will allow the fonts to be easilly bundled 
with GPL licensed desktops, but also under the OFL any webfont versions 
of the fonts will be free to be used across the web. This seems to me to 
be a good solution for keeping the fonts as free as possible.

If anyone sees a hitch in this, please let me know! :)

Thanks for input/advice so far, very much appreciated.

-vernon



>
>  > >> 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.
>


>
>  > I suggest that the simplest solution would be to make the Oxygen font
>
>  > available under GPLv2, GPLv3 and OFL.



> Is it comply wrong if we licence it like everything else on oxygen as
> LGPL??? onestly i dont care one bit about this issues as long as its
> free and open im OK.
>

_______________________________________________
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]