- From: Dave Crossland <dave@lab6.com>
- Date: Mon, 6 Jul 2009 07:10:12 +0100
- To: www-font@w3.org
2009/7/6 Christopher Fynn <cfynn@gmx.net>: > > If some web-font format becomes widespread or mandatory you can sure it > won't be long before someone creates a web-font to ttf/otf converter. > Someone else might then re-convert them back to web-fonts and so-on. Trouble > is such re-generated fonts may then be different enough from the fonts they > ultimately derive from, that they become harder to discover and prove they > are copies - or who copied what from whom. I just posted this idea a little more sharply at Typophile - http://typophile.com/node/59630 : This idea that obfuscation (via compression, or expressly for its own sake) will limit exposure of a font seems wishful thinking to me. Nothing will stop graphic designers and everyone else who loves fonts and who do not respect font licenses - which is most people, from what I can tell - from not installing inevitable “web font vacuum” browser extensions that will automatically install every font they happen to browse across into the OS system folder, and using these fonts in their print design work. I would also expect such “vacuums” to do what non-paying web publishers want, too, automatically stripping the watermarks, XUIDs and so on so that running a web-spider to search out unlicensed fonts doesn’t spot them. If font vendors try to proscribe the behavior of paying users in an attempt to annoy non-paying users, they will only hurt their own sales by annoying their paying users. Policing web fonts is going to be a total nightmare for those clients John Hudson just described on this list; those faced with the dilemma of having a font asset they wish to send to everyone who visits their website, yet not wanting anyone to use it. Perhaps Monotype and Adobe’s legal teams will have time and money in the recession to write takedown notices to people publishing their fonts without licenses, as it makes more sense for them to bet their existing revenues (from print based publishers, who are in decline) on the chance that new revenues from web publishers (who have pent up demand, and are growing) will be more profitable than sticking with the declining market. But for clients as John described, they paid all the costs and will not offset their loss of exclusivity through incoming revenue from the font assets.
Received on Monday, 6 July 2009 06:11:15 UTC