[gnu.org #954922] Vague "licensing" for the symbola font.

[gnu.org #954922] Vague "licensing" for the symbola font.

[Donald R Robertson III via RT]

> [ian@zenhack.net - Tue Nov 18 22:29:05 2014]:
> 
> (sending this to both the fsf and the guix-devel mailing list)
> 
> Quoting Ludovic Courtès (2014-11-16 16:09:33)
> > Ian Denhardt <ian@zenhack.net> skribis:
> >
> > > Quoting Ludovic Courtès (2014-11-13 15:15:37)
> > >> Did you hear from them?
> > >
> > > Finally, yes. Here's the full response:
> >
> > Great, thanks.
> >
> > > Quoting Donald R Robertson III (2014-11-11 10:57:53)
> >
> > [...]
> >
> > >> The best course of action would be to contact the author to try
> and
> > >> clear up these issues. As you can see from our license list
> > >> <https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html#Fonts>, however,
> there
> > >> isn't a font license that we could really recommend that would
> cover the
> > >> same ground as what the author has outlined. But we could work
> with him
> > >> to try and get a better licensing situation. If you think it is
> worth
> > >> pursuing, please let us know and we will contact them
> >
> > It’s probably worth pursuing, although I can imagine they’d rather
> spend
> > a reasonable effort on it.
> 
> Alright, I think we should contact him. My guess is he's not likely to
> be very familiar with GNU/Linux or the Free Software community in
> general (in addition to the licensing thing, the zip file contains
> a .docx). I feel like if I draft a letter myself I'm likely to assume
> too much knowledge.
> 
> Don, if the developers here agree, I'd appreciate it if you'd contact
> the author, or perhaps draft a letter at least.
> 
> -Ian

Just an update that I am in contact with the author, and we are working
on the issues. Thank you for your time.

> 
> 
-- 
Sincerely,

Donald R. Robertson, III, J.D.
Copyright & Licensing Associate
Free Software Foundation
51 Franklin Street, Fifth Floor
Boston, MA 02110, USA
Phone +1-617-542-5942 
Fax +1-617-542-2652

---

Fwd: [gnu.org #954922] Vague "licensing" for the symbola font.

[Ian Denhardt]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 837 bytes --]

Latest word on the Symbola font from the FSF:

Forwarded message from Donald R Robertson III via RT (2015-01-14 11:15:14):
> Hello again,
> 
> Unfortunately the discussion with the author has broken down. They will
> not change the license, as they do not believe in licensing. This
> legally puts us in a bad spot. While it is unlikely that they are
> looking to sue us, the due diligence required here puts a strain our our
> limited legal counsel resources. So the question becomes: how critical
> are these files, and would we be better off simply not distributing them? 
> -- 
> Sincerely,
> 
> Donald R. Robertson, III, J.D.
> Copyright & Licensing Associate
> Free Software Foundation
> 51 Franklin Street, Fifth Floor
> Boston, MA 02110, USA
> Phone +1-617-542-5942 
> Fax +1-617-542-2652
> 
> ---
> 
> 

[-- Attachment #2: signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 819 bytes --]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2
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=0kjC
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: Fwd: [gnu.org #954922] Vague "licensing" for the symbola font.

[Ludovic Courtès]

Ian Denhardt <ian@zenhack.net> skribis:

> Latest word on the Symbola font from the FSF:

Thanks Ian for the update.

I forgot the details, but IIRC Alex Kost was the initial submitter.
What can be done here?

Ludo’.

Re: Fwd: [gnu.org #954922] Vague "licensing" for the symbola font.

[Alex Kost]

Ludovic Courtès (2015-01-16 23:37 +0300) wrote:

> Ian Denhardt <ian@zenhack.net> skribis:
>
>> Latest word on the Symbola font from the FSF:
>
> Thanks Ian for the update.
>
> I forgot the details, but IIRC Alex Kost was the initial submitter.
> What can be done here?

Yes it was me, so if I understand correctly, Symbola font should not
appear in the distribution (because of the license problem), right?

-- 
Alex

Re: Fwd: [gnu.org #954922] Vague "licensing" for the symbola font.

[Ludovic Courtès]

Alex Kost <alezost@gmail.com> skribis:

> Ludovic Courtès (2015-01-16 23:37 +0300) wrote:
>
>> Ian Denhardt <ian@zenhack.net> skribis:
>>
>>> Latest word on the Symbola font from the FSF:
>>
>> Thanks Ian for the update.
>>
>> I forgot the details, but IIRC Alex Kost was the initial submitter.
>> What can be done here?
>
> Yes it was me, so if I understand correctly, Symbola font should not
> appear in the distribution (because of the license problem), right?

Does the license problem applies to all the files or just some?

If it makes sense, we could simply remove the offending files.

Ludo’.

Re: Fwd: [gnu.org #954922] Vague "licensing" for the symbola font.

[Alex Kost]

Ludovic Courtès (2015-01-17 19:28 +0300) wrote:

> Alex Kost <alezost@gmail.com> skribis:
>
>> Ludovic Courtès (2015-01-16 23:37 +0300) wrote:
>>
>>> Ian Denhardt <ian@zenhack.net> skribis:
>>>
>>>> Latest word on the Symbola font from the FSF:
>>>
>>> Thanks Ian for the update.
>>>
>>> I forgot the details, but IIRC Alex Kost was the initial submitter.
>>> What can be done here?
>>
>> Yes it was me, so if I understand correctly, Symbola font should not
>> appear in the distribution (because of the license problem), right?
>
> Does the license problem applies to all the files or just some?
>
> If it makes sense, we could simply remove the offending files.

IIUC it applies to all the files.  Quotation from
<http://users.teilar.gr/~g1951d/>:

--8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
In lieu of a licence

Fonts and documents in this site are not pieces of property or merchandise items; they carry no trademark, copyright, license or other market tags; they are offered free for any use.
--8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---

-- 
Alex

Re: Fwd: [gnu.org #954922] Vague "licensing" for the symbola font.

[Ludovic Courtès]

Alex Kost <alezost@gmail.com> skribis:

> Ludovic Courtès (2015-01-17 19:28 +0300) wrote:
>
>> Alex Kost <alezost@gmail.com> skribis:
>>
>>> Ludovic Courtès (2015-01-16 23:37 +0300) wrote:
>>>
>>>> Ian Denhardt <ian@zenhack.net> skribis:
>>>>
>>>>> Latest word on the Symbola font from the FSF:
>>>>
>>>> Thanks Ian for the update.
>>>>
>>>> I forgot the details, but IIRC Alex Kost was the initial submitter.
>>>> What can be done here?
>>>
>>> Yes it was me, so if I understand correctly, Symbola font should not
>>> appear in the distribution (because of the license problem), right?
>>
>> Does the license problem applies to all the files or just some?
>>
>> If it makes sense, we could simply remove the offending files.
>
> IIUC it applies to all the files.  Quotation from
> <http://users.teilar.gr/~g1951d/>:
>
> In lieu of a licence
>
> Fonts and documents in this site are not pieces of property or merchandise items; they carry no trademark, copyright, license or other market tags; they are offered free for any use.

OK, so despite the authors intent, we can’t really use them.

Thanks,
Ludo’.

Re: [gnu.org #954922] Vague "licensing" for the symbola font.

[Jason Self]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 814 bytes --]

Alex Kost <alezost@gmail.com> wrote:

> IIUC it applies to all the files.  Quotation from
> <http://users.teilar.gr/~g1951d/>:
>
> --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
> In lieu of a licence
>
> Fonts and documents in this site are not pieces of property or 
> merchandise items; they carry no trademark, copyright, license or 
> other market tags; they are offered free for any use.
> --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---

Couldn't this be used as a statement that they're abandoning their
copyright [0]? It's been saved away on the Wayback Machine [1] for
future documentation, just in case.

[0]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abandonment_%28legal%29#Abandonment_of_copyright
[1]
https://web.archive.org/web/20150113144655/http://users.teilar.gr/~g1951d/

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]

Re: [gnu.org #954922] Vague "licensing" for the symbola font.

[John Darrington]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1883 bytes --]

On Sun, Jan 18, 2015 at 07:15:01AM -0800, Jason Self wrote:
     Alex Kost <alezost@gmail.com> wrote:
     
     > IIUC it applies to all the files.  Quotation from
     > <http://users.teilar.gr/~g1951d/>:
     >
     > --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
     > In lieu of a licence
     >
     > Fonts and documents in this site are not pieces of property or 
     > merchandise items; they carry no trademark, copyright, license or 
     > other market tags; they are offered free for any use.
     > --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---
     
     Couldn't this be used as a statement that they're abandoning their
     copyright [0]? It's been saved away on the Wayback Machine [1] for
     future documentation, just in case.
     
     [0]
     http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abandonment_%28legal%29#Abandonment_of_copyright
     [1]
     https://web.archive.org/web/20150113144655/http://users.teilar.gr/~g1951d/


Like the wikipedia article says, in many countries jurists argue if it is 
possible to "place" copyright in the public domain.   In the UK it is utterly
impossible.  In Australia, it is explicitly provided in the Copyright Act.  In
the USA, nobody is sure.

In the case, that it is not possible, then the statement 
that "[the fonts] carry no copyright", would simply not be true.

It could become a real issue, if, say, the author dies, his hiers then decide to
 make it into a proprietary software.

I think Guix is right to take the cautious approach.  

(What actually depends on these fonts?  There are oodles of fonts today.  Can it
be substituted by something else?)


J'


-- 
PGP Public key ID: 1024D/2DE827B3 
fingerprint = 8797 A26D 0854 2EAB 0285  A290 8A67 719C 2DE8 27B3
See http://sks-keyservers.net or any PGP keyserver for public key.


[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

Re: [gnu.org #954922] Vague "licensing" for the symbola font.

[Alex Kost]

John Darrington (2015-01-18 18:58 +0300) wrote:

[...]
> It could become a real issue, if, say, the author dies, his hiers then decide to
>  make it into a proprietary software.
>
> I think Guix is right to take the cautious approach.  
>
> (What actually depends on these fonts?  There are oodles of fonts today.  Can it
> be substituted by something else?)

Nothing depends on Symbola font, so it may be safely ignored.  I just
use it all the time, so I proposed this package several months ago.

-- 
Alex