Ubuntu Fonts (yes, i searched the forum first)

[benplaut]

come on, guys! We need this font!

There was a post a while back that kassetra (member.php?u=7047) had created a full font set along the same theme as the Ubuntu standard font, but she was waiting for approval to release it.

Any update on that? :)

[kassetra]

come on, guys! We need this font!

There was a post a while back that kassandra had created a full font set along the same theme as the Ubuntu standard font, but she was waiting for approval to release it.

Any update on that? :)

Well, *I* have now created two different Ubuntu fonts, but I have not received word if I can release them or not.
(Kassandra is a different community member)

I really don't want to distribute something that entails their copyrighted work without permission first.

[fizgig]

Whenever my office mates don't get back to me with input I might need in a report, I simply send out an email to all of them stating that I'm releasing my report "as is" on Monday unless I get your comments.

Perhaps a similar approach might work here?

[kassetra]

Whenever my office mates don't get back to me with input I might need in a report, I simply send out an email to all of them stating that I'm releasing my report "as is" on Monday unless I get your comments.

Perhaps a similar approach might work here?

No, it is their copyrighted letters in the font, and that form the basis of the font. If I do not get express permission to release the font with those copyrighted letters, that would be bad.

[wfx]

i ask myself why a distribution like ubuntu does use a none free font?

[kassetra]

i ask myself why a distribution like ubuntu does use a none free font?

It's not that they used a non-free font.

They created the letters independent of any font. I took those letters and then created a font based on them.

The only reason the font is not "free" is because I do not have permission to distribute the font.

[wfx]

They created the letters independent of any font. I took those letters and then created a font based on them.
Ok the word "ubuntu" in the logo is not based on a exist font.
Is this art not freely avail or why you dont have the premissions to use it?

Ps:
Please what software do you use to build font?

[bvc]

yeah, if you created the font then it is yours and not theirs.

[kassetra]

yeah, if you created the font then it is yours and not theirs.

Yes, the font is mine, but the artwork contained in the font is theirs... their copyrighted letters, so I have to have permission to distribute.

[kassetra]

Ok the word "ubuntu" in the logo is not based on a exist font.
Is this art not freely avail or why you dont have the premissions to use it?

Ps:
Please what software do you use to build font?

The artwork is freely available to use, but not redistribute, exactly. I've checked into this like five times already.

As for the software... I used a font building tool in my vmware session... It's windows only... because font creation in linux is not exactly doable, at least moderately easily.

[bvc]

Yes, the font is mine, but the artwork contained in the font is theirs... their copyrighted letters, so I have to have permission to distribute.
what? the design? I seriously doubt you where able to replicate to a 'T' the artwork. Any deviation from the original make it yours. Just like with music. It may be obvious where the influence came from and most may consider it a rip off, and it may be a rip, as in this case that was the idea, but the law is the law.

What you are talking about is the same thing as me not making available the recolored Human icon theme. 'Respect'. I can dig that :)

[wfx]

im confused.
Is there any record to read (maybe a german one would be better for me) or
can you are make it a bit more clear?

[Paul Sinnett]

what? the design? I seriously doubt you where able to replicate to a 'T' the artwork. Any deviation from the original make it yours. Just like with music. It may be obvious where the influence came from and most may consider it a rip off, and it may be a rip, as in this case that was the idea, but the law is the law.

What you are talking about is the same thing as me not making available the recolored Human icon theme. 'Respect'. I can dig that :)

This is called a "derivative work (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Derivative_work)" and the same restrictions apply as for straight copies. Although you may also claim copyright on the bits that are "yours." In the case of the Ubuntu artwork, the legal page (http://www.ubuntulinux.org/legal) seems to suggest that it is okay to distribute copies for non-comercial or eductional use so long as you also distribute the copyright information of the original.

[bvc]

...but Ubuntu did not create a font, did they? No.

[kassetra]

what? the design? I seriously doubt you where able to replicate to a 'T' the artwork. Any deviation from the original make it yours. Just like with music. It may be obvious where the influence came from and most may consider it a rip off, and it may be a rip, as in this case that was the idea, but the law is the law.

What you are talking about is the same thing as me not making available the recolored Human icon theme. 'Respect'. I can dig that :)

No, I copied the glyphs *exactly* into the font - because svg can correlated directly to font glyphs. It's not a derivation of the letters: u, b, p, n, t, f, d, q. It's EXACTLY copied.

[MetalMusicAddict]

Man. Leave the gal (kassetra) alone. She knows what he has to do and he will release it when he can.

Ive seen this same type of badgering drive away programmers at other fourms.

EDIT: Apparently kassetra is a gal. Please correct me If Im still wrong. ;)

[bvc]

eewwww.....cool!
you're just wanting to give it away, right?
I don't see how a font is any diff than the 100's of wallpapers floating around.

[bvc]

Man. Leave the guy (kassetra) alone. He knows what he has to do and he will release it when he can.

Ive seen this same type of badgering drive away programmers at other fourms. :roll:

[benplaut]

Man. Leave the guy (kassetra) alone. He knows what he has to do and he will release it when he can.

Ive seen this same type of badgering drive away programmers at other fourms.

didn't mean it that way... was just seeing if kassetra had gotten permisssion for release ;-)

==
Oh well... i might just make one myself (inkscape works, too... as long as you can stand to type letter by letter :roll:)

It was worth a try :razz:

[MetalMusicAddict]

I dont think anyone is being particulary mean. Just I know what its like to be on the the receiving end of 100 "Why nots?" and constant questioning of your reasoning. ;)

[bvc]

well certainly no one here knows what it's like be badgered in a way that's not mean, so we appreciate you letting us know ;-)

[kassetra]

Ok all you people (yes, I am a girl!) -

Here is some more info, and then can we leave it at that until I get word back?

Since I used the exact copied glyphs in the font, and therefore, the logo has not been preserved intact (ubuntu is not the roman alphabet), I do not have the right to distribute the font without permission.

Logos and the text-logo that are used complete and in accordance with the specified usage descriptions are not subject to the same rules as my font is - simply because they are used as a whole, and not taken apart like the font does.

[Paul Sinnett]

...but Ubuntu did not create a font, did they? No.

That doesn't matter for derivative works.

[Paul Sinnett]

Here is some more info, and then can we leave it at that until I get word back?

Since I used the exact copied glyphs in the font, and therefore, the logo has not been preserved intact (ubuntu is not the roman alphabet), I do not have the right to distribute the font without permission.

Logos and the text-logo that are used complete and in accordance with the specified usage descriptions are not subject to the same rules as my font is - simply because they are used as a whole, and not taken apart like the font does.

Sorry if this seems like flogging a dead horse, but I think this issue is probably of general interest to anyone considering creating derivative works based on Canonical copyright material. So I've done a bit of research...

The font you have created, while it may have been inspired by (and copied from) the Ubuntu logo, is not actually the trademarked logo, nor could anyone reasonably confuse it with the trademarked logo. If someone were to take your font and use it to generate a derivate logo (rather than using the original, that might be a trademark infringement - but that is up to them...) In fact there is a company that purely produces fonts based on trademark letter forms (http://www.fontmesa.com/famous_font_usage.htm).

However, as well as a trademark, the Ubuntu lettering is also the copyright of Canonical. Your font is almost certainly a derivative work of that and therefore bound by the same terms. (Although, interestingly, not in the US where fonts are not copyrightable (http://www.totse.com/en/law/justice_for_all/sf-legal.html) anyway.) Canonicals terms for use of their copyright on anything available from the Canonical site is roughly equivalent to the Creative Commons non-comerical license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/2.0/). In fact it's a shame Canonical didn't think of using that license since it covers everything they require whilst removing the need for people to bother them with requests all time.

In my opinion you are free to distribute your font as long as you: don't do it commerically, and you include the Ubuntu artwork copyright and licensing information. You are probably even free to sell the font in the US but I don't know if that applies anywhere else.

Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer... I am also not a liar :^o

[bvc]

That is correct Paul....
...you word things much better than I, but I really didn't see why no one else could see this. Oh, well.

[benplaut]

paul: impressive! you should be a lawyer :razz:

[panickedthumb]

1. kassetra has briefly outlined how she made this font. Anyone who really really wants it could do the same thing she did and make it themselves.

2. regardless of the legalities, kassetra has said that she will not release this until she hears back from Canonical. It's her work, it's her choice. If she doesn't feel comfortable releasing it until it's condoned by Canonical, that is her right.

So, let's just stop this right now. She'll release it when she feels it's time, or not. That's her choice, and nobody should try to convince her otherwise, since it's obvious many already HAVE tried.

[jdong]

Thanks, Panickedthumb, for bringing this thread to my attention. For the above mentioned reasons, this discussion is closed.

If you have any disagreements about this decision, please PM me about it (not any other moderators -- they're innocent). I highly advise that you cool your temper before doing so ;). Users have been banned before for extreme rudeness to moderators.