On Friday, February 03, 2012 1:48:56 PM Shriramana Sharma wrote: > Luke, IANAL but AFAIK the font exception is merely a *clarification* that > using this font in a document does not constitute a derivative work but is > merely "use" of the font so the document itself need not be GPL-ed. This is > however true even without the clarification being explicitly stated and so > you can perfectly use a GPL-ed font without any problems.
IANAL either, but the law (and judge) define what is or is not a derivative work. Based on history, I would be surprised if they ruled it was not. Unlike the Linux kernel clarification, the font exception is explicitly an *exception* and there are notable legal opinions that without this exception, at least embedding the font in a document is a derivative work: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Legal_considerations_for_fonts#allow-embedding However, I am satisfied that James taking this position on the mailing list is sufficient grounds to argue otherwise at least in this case, if it ever became a legal matter.
