- From: Thomas Lord <lord@emf.net>
- Date: Thu, 30 Jul 2009 19:59:59 -0700
- To: "Levantovsky, Vladimir" <Vladimir.Levantovsky@MonotypeImaging.com>
- Cc: John Daggett <jdaggett@mozilla.com>, www-font <www-font@w3.org>
On Thu, 2009-07-30 at 22:44 -0400, Levantovsky, Vladimir wrote: > On Thursday, July 30, 2009 8:10 PM Thomas Lord wrote: > > > > > > If EOT-lite becomes the recommendation, is the > > > > previously discussed patent de-encumberence of MTX > > > > included in the deal? > > > > > No, as currently defined EOT-Lite does not include MTX compression. > > > > That's something that will come up as things move > > forward. I think that's a problem. Can we hear > > from Monotype on that? Maybe they wouldn't mind > > if MTX patents became safe to implement if EOT-lite > > is adopted. Otherwise, we wind up with an arguably > > discriminatory Recommendation. > > > > Monotype would be very supportive if MTX compression is included as part > of EOT-Lite Recommendation. Our offer and our commitment remains the > same - we will provide unrestricted royalty-free patent license if MTX > is included in the deal. Cool. I think that if there is a bit reserved that signals MTX compression, MTX freedom from patent hassles has to be part of the deal. -t > > Vladimir > >
Received on Friday, 31 July 2009 03:00:40 UTC