Re: WebFonts ready for use

On May 1, 2008, at 2:33 AM, Dave Crossland wrote:

> 2008/5/1 David Woolley <>:
>> Patrick Garies wrote:
>>> This could be dealt with by adding a shareability flag and/or domain
>>> white‚Äźlisting mechanism to CSS3 Web Fonts that could prevent a  
>>> Web font from
>>> being shared indirectly.
>> That's what EOT fonts already do, and it is that model that people  
>> are
>> rejecting in this thread.  A
>> EOT basically is a domain whitelisting wrapper.
> I think it is dramatically more than that; because of the encryption,
> EOT is an "effective technological measure" under any applicable law
> fulfilling obligations under article 11 of the WIPO copyright treaty
> adopted on 20 December 1996, or similar laws prohibiting or
> restricting circumvention of such measures.

Is a trivial encryption algorithm like XOR with 0x50 really an  
"effective technological measure"? It has the strength of rot13, and  
now is publicly specified in a W3C Member Submission. Is the C ^  
operator now a "circumvention device"?


Received on Friday, 2 May 2008 00:17:01 UTC