Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

You wouldn't steal a font

fedi.rib.gay

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 421 posts

Re: You wouldn't steal a font

#101

Post by EvanAnderson »

neilpanchal wrote: post #67
homebrewer wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The "peak of perfection" does not support even just European languages, not having full coverage even for Latin scripts. But it's a "love letter for the golden age of computing", and the golden age had massive problems with scripts for languages other than English, so maybe it's intentional. https://usgraphics.com/static/products/TX-02/datasheet/TX-02...

Hey, Berkeley Mono supports most Western European languages, can you tell me what's missing? I can add it. Btw, the tagline is about the aesthetics. :)

Is it a mistake, on page 4 of the linked datasheet, that "SemiBold" is shown for two different weights? I can't help but think that something like "DemiBold" was what the lighter weight was supposed to be labeled.

Re: You wouldn't steal a font

#102

Post by grishka »

zeroq wrote: post #72
phony-account wrote: post #24

Is this the wrong time to rant about font licensing though? I’ve always bought and paid for fonts, but as I’ve gradually transitioned to mobile app development, I one day realized that all the fonts I bought for print are now worthless to me. These crazy outdated licenses that let you print as many magazines or books you want forever, for a one-time price. But if your hobby is making apps, then suddenly the same font…

And god forbid you to accidently ship the font with your game or mobile app! :)

How does one even use a font in an app without shipping it with the app? In a logo or something?

Re: You wouldn't steal a font

#103

Post by jmwilson »

neilpanchal wrote: post #98
testing1235 wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hi Neil, I'm not that person you replied to but in my projects I require Cyrillic glyphs for Russian and Ukrainian texts. Also when checking out your website just now, I wasn't able to add a Berkeley Mono App License module in your ordering system. I assume I need a App License to embed the font in my app? But I also can't seem to find any information about the app license itself on your site as well.

Cyrillic is not supported so Berkeley Mono might not be suitable for your application. Are you building a Web app (Webfonts) or a Desktop/Mobile app (App license)? Please email me.

The lack of the ohm symbol Ω is also quite a bummer given the technical domain of the font.

Re: You wouldn't steal a font

#104

Post by NikkiA »

charcircuit wrote: post #6
azalemeth wrote: post #4

That is an absolutely brilliant turn of events – strong evidence that the font in an anti-piracy campaign was itself arguably a copyright-infringing knock-off. Someone should sue FACT for copyright infringement – and refuse to settle.

You can't copyright a font.

FACT/FAST are a UK organisation, where font copyright is espressly enumerated in the copyright law.

Re: You wouldn't steal a font

#105

Post by grishka »

refulgentis wrote: post #69
phony-account wrote: post #24

Is this the wrong time to rant about font licensing though? I’ve always bought and paid for fonts, but as I’ve gradually transitioned to mobile app development, I one day realized that all the fonts I bought for print are now worthless to me. These crazy outdated licenses that let you print as many magazines or books you want forever, for a one-time price. But if your hobby is making apps, then suddenly the same font…

In general, AFAIK, the general assumption is every font is absurdly easy to steal, and that you'll do so before purchasing it. So it's de facto "free unlimited trial, free for personal use, pay for business if you have a soul and shame"

Depends on the country.

I researched it for Russia recently and apparently the law is much stricter about fonts here than in the US. Both the character shapes and the "code" are copyrightable so you ain't getting away with converting it into a different format either. Companies did get sued over this and did have to pay millions of rubles in fines and licensing fees for their past usage. Not sure about individuals but I wouldn't try my luck with any non-free fonts made by Russian designers.

Re: You wouldn't steal a font

#106

Post by neilpanchal »

EvanAnderson wrote: post #101
neilpanchal wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hey, Berkeley Mono supports most Western European languages, can you tell me what's missing? I can add it. Btw, the tagline is about the aesthetics. :)

Is it a mistake, on page 4 of the linked datasheet, that "SemiBold" is shown for two different weights? I can't help but think that something like "DemiBold" was what the lighter weight was supposed to be labeled.

Yes, that's a typo. Need to redo the entire datasheet and possibly find a way to automate it using reportlab or some other PDF library. Right now, it is in InDesign and it is a pain to keep updating it.

Re: You wouldn't steal a font

#107

Post by neilpanchal »

jmwilson wrote: post #103
neilpanchal wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cyrillic is not supported so Berkeley Mono might not be suitable for your application. Are you building a Web app (Webfonts) or a Desktop/Mobile app (App license)? Please email me.

The lack of the ohm symbol Ω is also quite a bummer given the technical domain of the font.

Agree, I need to work on the full greek glyphset.

Re: You wouldn't steal a font

#108

Post by al_borland »

phony-account wrote: post #24

Is this the wrong time to rant about font licensing though? I’ve always bought and paid for fonts, but as I’ve gradually transitioned to mobile app development, I one day realized that all the fonts I bought for print are now worthless to me. These crazy outdated licenses that let you print as many magazines or books you want forever, for a one-time price. But if your hobby is making apps, then suddenly the same font…

I've only purchased one font, which I use in my editor and terminal, so I don't have to worry much about the license. I can't be bothered to use custom fonts for any projects. With all the licensing considerations it just makes me cut out the whole idea to simplify my life.

Re: You wouldn't steal a font

#109

Post by gkoberger »

tptacek wrote: post #92
phony-account wrote: post #24

Is this the wrong time to rant about font licensing though? I’ve always bought and paid for fonts, but as I’ve gradually transitioned to mobile app development, I one day realized that all the fonts I bought for print are now worthless to me. These crazy outdated licenses that let you print as many magazines or books you want forever, for a one-time price. But if your hobby is making apps, then suddenly the same font…

There is maybe nothing in the entire world that I am less sympathetic towards than the cause of font piracy / font liberation. You have perfectly good --- in fact, historically excellent --- fonts loaded by default for free on any computer you buy today. Arguing for the oppression of font licenses is, to me, like arguing about how much it costs to buy something at Hermès. Just don't shop at Hermès.

I agree the average person is likely fine with the fonts on their computer, but this is profoundly misunderstanding the importance of design. Typefaces are incredibly important, and have been for centuries.

I'd argue that complaining about font prices is less like a Hermes bag, and more like complaining about high-end ingredients when a supermarket has cheap stuff. Yes, you can get away with cheaper materials when cooking, but the final product will deeply suffer.

Re: You wouldn't steal a font

#110

Post by rafram »

NoMoreNicksLeft wrote: post #62
azalemeth wrote: post #4

That is an absolutely brilliant turn of events – strong evidence that the font in an anti-piracy campaign was itself arguably a copyright-infringing knock-off. Someone should sue FACT for copyright infringement – and refuse to settle.

> was itself arguably a copyright-infringing knock-off. In US law, there is no such thing. The shape of a glyph (or many) isn't even slightly copyrightable. This is settled law. Fonts (on computers) have a special status that makes them semi-copyrightable in that some jackass judge from the 1980s called them "computer programs" and so they have the same protection as software... but this won't protect against knockof…

They are computer programs. Not sure why you’d crudely insult the judge for saying that.
Post reply on HN