Hi Thomas, >> initiated that discussion) posted to tex-live? After the discussion on >> tex-fonts I think it was pretty clear that one is not allowed to >> distribute any fonts derived from Utopia. Otherwise it would be free in >> the FSF sense. > > That "Otherwise" does not make any sense. The freedom to distribute > modified versions of "the software" is one of the core items in the FSF > definition of free software. In the FSF sense, the lack of this freedom > makes it non-free.
I guess I wasn't as clear as I wanted to be. I wanted to say that Utopia is non-free, because derived works aren't allowed, and that I think this is the only thing missing for it to be free. If derived works were allowed, Utopia would be free. > Ok, I'll think about it. Thanks for considering. BTW, one easier thing to consider for inclusion in teTeX is mpsproof, a extension of mproof that works with pdfTeX. cheerio ralf
