RE: What constitutes protection [was: About using CORS]

> From: [mailto:public-webfonts-wg-
>] On Behalf Of John Hudson
> Sent: Wednesday, April 28, 2010 11:03 AM

> I get the impression that some browser makers still consider a separate
> web font format to be a waste of time -- or at best an exercise in
> making font makers feel better while not actually offering them
> anything
> substantial -- since it offers no 'real' protection of font IP. 

That's not the case for Microsoft. Mozilla invented and implemented WOFF so 
I doubt they see it as a waste of time. Chromium is adding support as well.
I don't know about Apple.

As for Opera, Hakon Wium Lie has been involved in this discussion for a 
very long time and is a vocal proponent of WOFF. And then there is Anne, 
who was not involved in last year's www-font discussions - according to 
the archive and my assumption that he wouldn't bring up the same arguments 
we've all argued to death and largely settled - nor, as far as I remember, 
in either of the last two TPAC meetings where this was debated at length. 
(I don't know if he was before then as I wasn't involved).

While it's not very helpful of him to question the reasons for this work
as if nothing of substance had been discussed or agreed before his involvement, 
I don't think he realizes that it might come across that way either. Because, 
well, many things about web fonts, their history and market realities take time 
to digest. When compared against an uninformed ideal, the 

The good news is that if we don't feel like re-hashing something that
has already been discussed a thousand times, we can just give Anne a very direct
and terse response when he brings it up: "Bullshit". 

And he will completely understand:


Received on Monday, 3 May 2010 23:33:22 UTC