Re: Rumours of the death of "new, professionally designed typefaces" are perhaps exaggerated?

Robert O'Callahan wrote:

>     The idea that there should be multiple formats to reflect the
>     difference in IP or licensing status -- i.e. naked fonts for free
>     fonts and some different, probably wrapper format for non-free fonts
>     -- strikes me as daft.

> The idea that creators and users of free fonts should be forced to jump 
> through hoops to "protect the IP" of third parties they have no 
> connection with strikes *me* as daft.

The idea that most computer users recognise a distinction between free 
fonts and non-free fonts similarly strikes me as daft, and unsupported 
by any evidence that I have seen in fifteen years in this business. The 
meaningful distinction to most users is between fonts that they have and 
fonts that they don't have. So I remain opposed to a web font format 
that encourages such users to treat any font they find in use on the web 
as a font that they now have and encourages them to use any font that 
they have as a web font. It is a slippery slope steep enough to appear a 
precipice to most font makers and to companies that have invested 
considerable amounts of money in fonts.


Received on Monday, 3 August 2009 23:01:20 UTC