zlacker

>>neilpa+(OP)
The licensing is unclear/vague/contradictory... I'm totally confused what the 'developer' license actually means when it says you can use it for "personal use in professional context, but not commercial." And how is a subscription for a print product handled? Do I have to burn my printed materials if I don't renew a subscription?

Font vendors seem to _love_ coming up with weird snowflake licensing schemes rather than trying to stick with something well understood.

>>abeyer+an
I actually wanted to make it simpler. Separating professional use (this is how Input Mono font does it) and commercial use allows developers to use fonts for their daily work, but the machine belongs to their employer and the work they do is for their employer; while also being able to provide a separate Commercial license for companies and businesses.

There are no page view limits for websites (no trackers), installation limits , epub/ebook limits, etc. Basically it is along the lines of FontSpring's worry free license and I think its even better.

>>neilpa+Qp
This left me more confused - there are two cases :

- the typeface is used in media, or otherwise distributed

- the typeface is used locally in some app

Which license supports which case?

>>duped+Yv
Print licensing is very standard and used by the majority of the font fountries with exception of Lineto and a few others. For example, buy 1 seat (1 designer) and that designer can make unlimited print products as long as they have the seat to use it. It is based on installation on a computer that is used to develop the print materials. Some font fountries prevent the use of embedding fonts in the distributed media (such as PDFs).

Where I made an explicit exception in the license is for developers using the typeface in IDEs, and using it in professional context. Also check input mono license which is where I got the inspiration from: https://input.djr.com/license/