Re: [Plib-devel] Re: legal matters

[Andy R. <an...@pl...>]

Melchior FRANZ wrote:
> Well, what GLUT does or does not do, is secondary. I don't really
> think that there is an immediate threat. But it's clearly a
> copyright violation and as such not exactly desirable.

It's actually not wrong to claim copyright on the generated file.  You
generated it, not Bitstream or Adobe or whoever.  The data in the file
*also* represents a font that is in someone else's copyright, though,
so simply adding the font owner's copyright to the top of the file is
sufficient.  Something like this is perfectly legal:

// Copyright 1999, 2005 Steve & Melchior
// Font data Copyright <whenvever> Adobe Systems Inc.
// Font data Copyright <whenvever> Bitstream, Inc.
// Font data Copyright <whenvever> FooFoundry.com, Inc.

In practice, though, the fonts are freely redistributable in many
formats (X11 bitmaps, for example) that don't even provide the ability
to notate a copyright attribution.  Simply including those formats
isn't really a serious error, IMHO.  But it's easy to correct.

Andy