Re: [dvd-discuss] How many bits is a technical protection measure?

["Michael A Rolenz" <Michael.A.Rolenz(at)aero.org>]

But I would also contend that the use of bitmapped fonts also violates the 
warrenty of merchantability (That's the problem I had between Adobe and 
Mathematica. I can paste equations in as bitmaps but then have problems 
resizing them and they look jagged).

Actually, I agree wrt to using other fonts. Other than the faddish fonts 
there is little to be gained by not using something that is not in the 
public domain. Furhtermore, the purpose of allowing people to copyright 
fonts was to encourage the development of type faces for printing. Is that 
encouragement still really needed? Other than some of the faddish fonts 
that are obviously different, I'm not certain that it's worth society's 
time and effort to get involved in copyright squabbles about "well my font 
is a modified Goudy and SO.....gets copyright protection.", "What's 
modified?", I took 100 points in his outline and did a 42nd degree spline 
fit"




Noah silva <nsilva@atari-source.com>
Sent by: owner-dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu
04/24/02 08:45 AM
Please respond to dvd-discuss

 
        To:     dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu
        cc: 
        Subject:        Re: [dvd-discuss] How many bits is a technical protection measure?


Hmm...

I could see them saying that copying the entire font is infringement,
whereas certain charicters may not be, but considering that in any
reasonably sized letter, all of the charicters are used...

But I can also see how they could say that your final communication will
be a specific size, etc., and rendered bitmaps should be sent instead of
the outline fonts.

But really, if you can't use the fonts, people will be likely just to
choose other fonts.

 -- noah silva

On Wed, 24 Apr 2002, Michael A Rolenz wrote:

> Actually, I contend that it is NOT infringement if you  "copy the ttf 
file to your receipient". I have paid to use the font in 
> communications. If the font cannot be used in communications to others 
> then it is failing the test for merchantability.
> 
> This seems to be another old business model that needs to be retired. 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Charles Ballowe <hangman@steelballs.org>
> Sent by: owner-dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu
> 04/23/02 08:34 PM
> Please respond to dvd-discuss
> 
> 
>         To:     dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu
>         cc: 
>         Subject:        Re: [dvd-discuss] How many bits is a technical 
protection measure?
> 
> 
> The market for fonts is developed around a model where documents are not
> distributed in electronic form. For electronic distribution, 
non-embedable
> fonts make no sense.
> 
> Of course, those 2 bits don't prevent somebody from taking the font file
> and dropping it in their fonts directory. They just prevent it from 
being
> embedded in a document. You could still copy the ttf file to your 
> receipient,
> but that would be direct infringement - but not circumvention.
> 
> 
> On Tue, Apr 23, 2002 at 08:25:36PM -0700, microlenz@earthlink.net wrote:
> > Yes but a NOT professional printer has PAID for the ability to use the 

> font. 
> > Privately it matter not to me WHat font I use for most of what I write 

> <I 
> > prefer Times Roman> but when I create something with a font, I want 
that 
> font 
> > used when I publish it albeit to the limited distribution that I do. I 

> have 
> > paid for it. Personally I have no need to use that font ONLY when I 
> distribute
> > it to others and I paid to do so-even when the printer is acting as my 

> agent. 
> > In the electronic age, printers are acting more as agents as they take 

> camera 
> > ready copy.
> > 
> > The whole notion that one can distribute a font for someone to use in 
> private 
> > but not for public distribution of the work is so stupid that I wonder 

> what 
> > disease affects their mind other than SchiessKopf Syndrome.
> 
> 
> 
>