Interesting to see Source Code/Sans/Serif Pro left out of the discussion.
Why are tech companies making custom typefaces?
21–30 of 205 posts
Re: Why are tech companies making custom typefaces?
#22I don't think most tech companies actually want a completely custom, radically new typeface. They want a designer to trace Helvetica so they don't have to pay licensing fees.
Tiny customizations yield a unique outcome that can become more brand affiliated.
But if they do just want to avoid licensing..and? If it's less expensive to go through the design and construction and acceptance and branding, then the typeface is probably a tad overpriced. A grotesque sans-serif is a grotesque sans-serif, not a rip off of Helvetica. It doesn't own that entire concept.
While I find this piece interesting and informative, it seems biased in what it considers a useful outcome and what it doesn't. YouTube cutting off "random" pieces, for instance, yields a playful and unique typeface.
Re: Why are tech companies making custom typefaces?
#23Another reason is support for multiple languages. Many companies in western countries may start by using a typeface that only covers Latin script.
I was doing some work with Nokia around the time they released Nokia Pure, and I can certainly say that multiple language support was, at least for us, one of the primary drivers for using it, and it made our lives a lot easier at the time.
Re: Why are tech companies making custom typefaces?
#24I don't think most tech companies actually want a completely custom, radically new typeface. They want a designer to trace Helvetica so they don't have to pay licensing fees.
There are good looking open source fonts. So I don't think that's true.
Re: Why are tech companies making custom typefaces?
#25>I can’t help but feel that some of these companies wanted a >custom typeface simply because that’s what everyone else is >doing. This cargo cult mentality that is so prevalent in >design is at best wasteful and at worst illegal. Illegal?!? I'm going to need to see some work on this part. I couldn't find anything in the article that seemed to directly support the assertion. on edit: formatting
Yeah, the author needs to either remove that or clarify that point. That being said, I think the author means that all of these new type faces are very similar and so they may be infringing. Or that the companies want a familiar type face but don't want to pay for it, so they commission a look-a-like. But, that's just a very large grasp on my part from reading the article.
He may be bringing up the issue that it's perfectly legal to copy another font visually as long as you don't copy the font's data. (maybe something the author doesn't understand?)
Re: Why are tech companies making custom typefaces?
#26I don't think most tech companies actually want a completely custom, radically new typeface. They want a designer to trace Helvetica so they don't have to pay licensing fees.
I suspect most want something unique for their brand identity. But as always people don't know what they want until they see it, making it very hard to make something interesting that will go through all layers of approval.
Re: Why are tech companies making custom typefaces?
#27Another reason is support for multiple languages. Many companies in western countries may start by using a typeface that only covers Latin script. I was doing some work with Nokia around the time they released Nokia Pure, and I can certainly say that multiple language support was, at least for us, one of the primary drivers for using it, and it made our lives a lot easier at the time.
It would be interesting to see a resource that paired up equivalent fonts in different scripts. It could take into account form ("This Arabic font uses similar shapes to Helvetica"), function ("This is the Chinese 'default' front similar to Times New Roman"), and what the font implies ("This font is used as a 'futuristic' font in Japanese similar to Eurostyle or Bank Gothic in Latin script").
Re: Why are tech companies making custom typefaces?
#28"The idea that typefaces (rather than fonts, which are computer software) cannot be copyrighted in the United States is black letter law. 37 C.F.R. § 202.1(e). Under U.S. law, typefaces and their letter forms or glyphs are considered utilitarian objects whose public utility outweighs any private interest in protecting their creative elements."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intellectual_property_protecti...
There is an interesting history of font copying going back to the beginning of the USA. Where the US printers wanted to use European fonts (typefaces?), but didn't want to be hampered by their copyright laws. So there was no copyright protections of fonts in the US.
IANAL but Adobe lost some court case on this recently where they tried to accuse someone of "stealing/copying" a font. But since you can't copyright the alphabet, you can only copyright the font's actual data.
In theory you could trace any font you want in a font design program, and it is now legally yours.
Which makes sense if you are a business that uses fonts (ie a software company) as a primary part of your product instead of a permanent fee to a font provider.
Re: Why are tech companies making custom typefaces?
#29Interesting to see Source Code/Sans/Serif Pro left out of the discussion.
Adobe is a foundry, so it's not surprising that they design fonts. The more surprising part of the Source Pro family is the license afaik.
Re: Why are tech companies making custom typefaces?
#30I've never understood the fuzz about typography. Yes, it's important that fonts that are used a lot meet certain standards - but some people seem to make a big deal out of it.
Some people spend a lot of time color coordinating their clothes, some just wear whatever. Some people try to make everything they write look beautiful while making it easier to read, some people just type the letters and don't care. Good typography can make a massive difference to the presentation of text. To some people that makes it worth the effort
Based on the state of the web in 2018, with it's pop-ups in the middle of the page, cookie warning, laggy scrolling, and image pop-in that moves what you're reading, I find it very difficult to believe that that many people actually care much about the presentation of text.