[CCed to freetype-devel due to its importance.] I wrote:
> > http://www.forthehearts.net/werner-lembergs-ttfautohint-0-6-1-as-an-os-x-service/ > > Nice! This reminds me that I have to add the GNU exception clause > to the license similar to compilers so that processed fonts don't > inherit a GNU copyright... > > Any ideas how to formulate this? and Dave Crossland answered this: > I think the simplest thing is to advise people that if they use > ttfautohint on a font that uses a license other than GPLv2, their > font becomes subject to the terms for binary distribution of > FreeType under the FTL, and therefore their distribution > documentation must provide a disclaimer that states that the > software is based in part of the work of the FreeType Team. > > The license says, > > o Redistribution in binary form must provide a disclaimer that > states that the software is based in part of the work of the > FreeType Team, in the distribution documentation. We also > encourage you to put an URL to the FreeType web page in your > documentation, though this isn't mandatory. > > Which means the font's Copyright string in the NAME table should > have this string appended: > > Portions of this software are copyright © <year> The FreeType > Project (www.freetype.org). All rights reserved. I strongly dislike that. I don't consider a font which has been processed with FreeType (or ttfautohint) a `redistribution in binary form'. The FTL has never been meant to apply on such cases. Additionally, I want to make the bytecode created by ttfautohint freely available. It seems that we have a second issue (besides the patent stuff) which should be handled in the licenses. Fortunately, it should be rather straightforward, namely to take the GPL exception and reformulate it a bit. Opinions? Werner _______________________________________________ Freetype-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/freetype-devel
