zlacker

[return to "You wouldn't steal a font"]
1. azalem+t1[view] [source] 2025-04-23 19:53:37
>>todsac+(OP)
That is an absolutely brilliant turn of events – strong evidence that the font in an anti-piracy campaign was itself arguably a copyright-infringing knock-off.

Someone should sue FACT for copyright infringement – and refuse to settle.

◧◩
2. NoMore+D8[view] [source] 2025-04-23 20:46:56
>>azalem+t1
> was itself arguably a copyright-infringing knock-off.

In US law, there is no such thing. The shape of a glyph (or many) isn't even slightly copyrightable. This is settled law. Fonts (on computers) have a special status that makes them semi-copyrightable in that some jackass judge from the 1980s called them "computer programs" and so they have the same protection as software... but this won't protect against knockoffs.

◧◩◪
3. codedo+Ca[view] [source] 2025-04-23 21:01:30
>>NoMore+D8
Is this fair? It actually takes a lot of work (I assume) to design letter's shapes. Of course, not counting those who just trace 16-th century font without paying a compensation.
◧◩◪◨
4. ars+pc[view] [source] 2025-04-23 21:15:31
>>codedo+Ca
> takes a lot of work

The "sweat of the brow" argument is not valid in the US.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sweat_of_the_brow

[go to top]