- From: Thomas Lord <lord@emf.net>
- Date: Mon, 03 Aug 2009 18:11:41 -0700
- To: Thomas Phinney <tphinney@cal.berkeley.edu>
- Cc: John Hudson <tiro@tiro.com>, www-font@w3.org
On Mon, 2009-08-03 at 16:08 -0700, Thomas Phinney wrote: > If I were representing a type foundry, being > aware of this I sure as heck wouldn't try to initiate DMCA action > against a browser vendor for ignoring root strings in EOT Classic > fonts. Of course, people can initiate legal actions on any basis they > like, but I would be surprised to see any in this case. A very simple solution is for the EOTL backers to make a positive statement that other browsers, if they are going to do EOTL because of a MUST, then SHOULD support all of EOTC (and have patent protection in doing so) because that rounds out the degree of compatibility with IE<=8. The legal decision you cite is indeed very interesting but the 6-part test that they apply does not obviously come out the same way in this area, not least because of the content of this mailing list over the past few months. -t
Received on Tuesday, 4 August 2009 01:12:24 UTC