- From: Thomas Lord <lord@emf.net>
- Date: Fri, 24 Jul 2009 11:08:42 -0700
- To: karsten luecke <list@kltf.de>
- Cc: www-font@w3.org
This is a claim that has been made often in these discussions: On Fri, 2009-07-24 at 10:44 +0200, karsten luecke wrote: > Type foundries will not license raw TTF/OTF fonts > for @font-face linking. I don't wish to start a big long discussion where a bunch of non-lawyers try to figure out the law. And, I stipulate that the very fine legal staffs at some foundries have an opinion on this that differs from mine. I just want to note in passing: "Format shifting" has a lot of legal protection. The format conversion of a font file would, in this case, not comprise a circumvention of a technological means of limiting access. As a kind of test, imagine two scenarios: In one scenario, a font lawfully appears in format X, which is not TTF/OTF, on the web. A user, Alice, has a fancy browser program. Alice's browser program can directly display fonts only in TTF/OTF. However, it has a feature that when it is given a font in format X, it automatically converts that to TTF/OTF. Given Sony v. Universal (the famous betamax case), Alice is likely not to be infringing and the browser maker unlikely to be guilty of contributory infringement. In the other scenario, the same conversion occurs but on the server side. Bob, who has licensed the font for web use, did that conversion and serves up the converted file. It is hard to see how Bob's action could be infringing if Alice's is not. This is especially so because if Bob could not do that format conversion, he might not have bought the license in the first place - the format conversion increases rather than diminishes the commercial value of the font license. I see but one way in which Bob's performing the conversion could be infringing and that is "format X" contains information vital to the work - the type face - which can not be adequately represented in TTF/OTF. In that case, the conversion would alter the work in a significant way. That would be an act of creating a derived work which, we presume, Bob is not licensed to do. That suggests that if the type foundries wish to "not license for TTF/OTF on the web" then they would be wise to support the drive for a font file format that includes rich meta-data which, in the ordinary course of things, is presented to users (making it an essential part of the copyrighted work). The .webfont proposal might satisfy that requirement. The notion of a wrapper containing HTML meta-data might more clearly satisfy that requirement. -t
Received on Friday, 24 July 2009 18:09:23 UTC