Path: utzoo!utgpu!watserv1!watmath!att!linac!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!sdd.hp.com!usc!apple!arc!arc!steve From: steve@Advansoft.COM (Steve Savitzky) Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.hypercard Subject: Re: FONTs in stack: what's bad? Message-ID: Date: 29 Nov 90 23:50:04 GMT References: <1990Nov28.180031.677@sics.se> <46927@apple.Apple.COM> <1990Nov29.010919.24666@hayes.ims.alaska.edu> Sender: @advansoft.com Organization: Advansoft Research Corp, Santa Clara, CA Lines: 22 In-Reply-To: ffdkl@acad3.fai.alaska.edu's message of 29 Nov 90 01:09:19 GMT In article <1990Nov29.010919.24666@hayes.ims.alaska.edu> ffdkl@acad3.fai.alaska.edu (LaSota Daniel K) writes: Two other things to consider when moving fonts into stacks are copyrights and limited use. Copyrights: Just because you are technically able you aren't legally able to install any and every font any and everywhere. Correct me if I'm wrong, but my impression from reading about recent court decisions is that you can't copyright the appearance or bitmap of a font. Adobe won the right to copyright its *scalable* fonts because it was ruled that they were *programs*; presumably a different program that happened to result in the same bitmaps would not be an infringement of Adobe's copyright. There may concievably be licensing restrictions on some fonts, but that's a different matter, and might be hard to enforce. In any case, I believe that Adobe's screen fonts are free; they *want* to spread them around so as to make people want the scalable versions. disclaimer: I'm not a lawyer. Your mileage may differ. -- \ --Steve Savitzky-- \ ADVANsoft Research Corp \ REAL hackers use an AXE! \ \ steve@advansoft.COM \ 4301 Great America Pkwy \ #include \ \ arc!steve@apple.COM \ Santa Clara, CA 95954 \ 408-727-3357 \ \__ steve@arc.UUCP _________________________________________________________