- From: Philip TAYLOR (Ret'd) <P.Taylor@Rhul.Ac.Uk>
- Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2008 23:37:34 +0000
- To: David Woolley <forums@david-woolley.me.uk>
- CC: www-style@w3.org
David Woolley wrote: > There is a branding/design integrity issue here, as well as a copyright > one. Truetype and Type 1 use different splines (one cubic and one > quadratic) and use radically different hinting mechanisms. The result > of a conversion is a degraded font, and I doubt that many commercial > designers would consider it acceptable to use their font in any form > that does not work exactly like the form in which it left them. Fair point, and not one I had considered. [snip] > At least one of the fears of the font vendors must be that the man in > the street will believe they have a moral right to use any font they > find on the web (although such users are unlikely to buy, so maybe don't > pose a real risk - I've heard rumours that some software vendors > tolerate high levels of home user piracy, because it creates a market > for the software from business users, who they can exploit for revenue). I also think that (at least amongst users of integrity) piracy can lead to sales that would otherwise not occur. If there is a product that looks as if it will do the job, but the evaluation edition is so crippled that a real evaluation is impossible, then I do not think that it is unreasonable to try a pirate copy first, provided that this leads either to a sale or to the removal of the pirate version after a reasonable evaluation period. And provided, of course, that it is a /real/ evaluation, and not just an excuse to get the job done with zero outlay and then remove the software. Philip TAYLOR
Received on Thursday, 13 November 2008 23:38:15 UTC