Re: HVD Comic Serif Pro: licensing confusion

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]


Le Ven 26 novembre 2010 21:56, J.B. Nicholson-Owens a Ãcrit :

> Looking at it seems
> that Fedora considers CC BY 3.0 unported to be the only operative
> license on this font.  But how has Fedora determined that this
> Readme.txt file can be ignored?  I looked through the mailing list
> archives for this list and found no discussion referring to this font.

Font authors are often very confused about licensing. A large part of font
packaging is straightening the licensing bits with upstream :( So this is not
an isolated case. Many fonts are put on the wishlist because there seems to be
some intent by upstream to put them under a liberal license. This needs to be
confirmed by the packager. Usually, upstream is actually ok with the floss
license, just forgot to clean up previous licensing terms from readmes or from
the fonts themselves.

So don't panic. There's no reason to think the restrictive bits were added
after the CC-ing. You just need to check with upstream.

If you don't want to deal with this part, try to package fonts from upstreams
which are known to be licensing-clean (SIL fonts, Google font directory fonts,
ADF fontsÂ)

It will likely become better now that more and more people use the OFL. People
will just copy it (like software people do with the GPL) instead of crafting
terms by hand.

 the ones on this page not the
3rd-party reworks

Nicolas Mailhot

fonts mailing list

[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Users]     [Font Configuration]     [Fedora Maintainers]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Big List of Linux Books]     [Yosemite Forum]     [KDE Users]

  Powered by Linux