RE: The unmentionable

Thursday, July 30, 2009 Thomas Phinney <tphinney@cal.berkeley.edu>:

>In any case, this is really a sideline from the "real" discussions.
>Let's not get bogged down here. Lots of actual important stuff to discuss.

Agreed! Compliance, enforcement, etc.. - quite tangential. Chit chat at this
point. Que sera sera.

Cheers,

rich



-----Original Message-----
From: thomas.phinney@gmail.com [mailto:thomas.phinney@gmail.com] On Behalf
Of Thomas Phinney
Sent: Thursday, July 30, 2009 1:51 PM
To: rfink@readableweb.com
Cc: Christopher Fynn; John Hudson; www-font@w3.org
Subject: Re: The unmentionable

On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 9:43 AM, Richard Fink<rfink@readableweb.com> wrote:
> Thursday, July 30, 2009 Thomas Phinney <tphinney@cal.berkeley.edu>:
>
>>Even if it was possible to detect most illegitimate web usage, I'm not
>>nearly as hopeful as you about enforcement.
>
> Thomas,
>
> I think you wanted the word "compliance" but grabbed the word
"enforcement",
> instead.

No, I meant enforcement. That is, some folks seem to think like
Christopher F that the public nature of the web will lessen piracy in
two ways:

- people are flaunting their piracy because web sites are (mostly)
public; people will be inclined not to pirate publicly.

- the public nature of the situation will make it easier for foundries
to police things with "web fonts" than with desktop fonts.

I think the former notion has some truth to it (with caveats), but the
latter not as much as some folks seem to think. Besides not knowing if
somebody licensed a font from an alternate legit source, foundries
don't have the time and energy to deal with illegitimate online font
distribution they know about today! Having lots more of it will not
make things easier, no matter how obvious it is.

In any case, this is really a sideline from the "real" discussions.
Let's not get bogged down here. Lots of actual important stuff to
discuss.

Cheers,

T

Received on Thursday, 30 July 2009 18:38:44 UTC