Hi; OFL has two big issues: 1) It's copyleft so we cannot put it in the repository. 2) It cannot be redistributed on it's own: it has to be bundled with software, so we cannot make it available as and add-on package by itself.
The bitstream vera / dejavu fonts are not without issues: " ... no copy of one or more of the Font Software typefaces may be sold by itself." I have no opinion on how to manage this: it must be reviewed by a lawyer, so yes, this absolutely has to be taken to legal. regards, Pedro. --- On Fri, 11/18/11, Rob Weir <robw...@apache.org> wrote: > Herbert Duerr wrote: > > On 18.11.2011 06:16, Pedro Giffuni wrote: > >> > >> JFYI, Google released some AL2 fonts for Android: > >> https://github.com/android/platform_frameworks_base/tree/master/data/fonts > > > > This shows the need that fonts need to be available > for bundling with Apache > > projects. In my opinion also the popular "Open Font > License" > > is suitable for that as its conditions fulfill the > requirements of a > > category-A license. > > > > What is the process for having the OFL (Open Font > License) > > http://scripts.sil.org/cms/scripts/page.php?item_id=OFL_web > > be recognized as a category-A license? > > > > Start a discussion on the legal-discuss@ mailing list, > asking for Open > Font License to be categorized. > > > Which fonts can be bundled by an Apache project is not > only an interesting > > topic for productivity apps targeting end users. It is > also coming into > > focus for servers with the > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web_Open_Font_Format > > > > Some of the font licenses do not allow modification. > So they are not > really OSS licenses. But there seems to be permission > to use some of > these similar to how we treat category-b code. See: > http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#no-modification > > > > Herbert > > >
