Sergej, I am really not prepared to argue for or against licensing. I am a lowly member of this mail list for more than half a year, but it seems to me licensing problems around here have been sorted out a long time ago (decades). This discussion is turning into a dialogue between the two of us, and no other members actually show any interest in it. I have nothing more to add. Regarding GPL - it is a license for programs, not for other things. It not actually meant for fonts, images, texts etc. (as you will see, FSF uses a special license for documents). About GPL violations - check the GPL faq on http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html
Best regards: al_shopov Sergej Malinovski wrote: > > Alexander Shopov wrote: > > On a side notice - GPL can be in fact applied to fonts, with an > > amending clause saying that using GPL fonts in a document (in fact a > > PostScript program) does not imply it should be GPL-ed too in order > > to be publicly published. Which is actually what is probably needed > > - GPLing the font for the purpose of people use it and change it > > freely, but not putting pressure on people to GPL content. (similar > > to LGPL). > > I see... What if you included a GPLed image in or made a part > of a non-GPLed program? Would that be a violation of GPL too? > > -- > Sergej Malinovski [http://dreamer.nitro.dk] > > _______________________________________________ > Fonts mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/fonts _______________________________________________ Fonts mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/fonts
