Re: Bitstream Vera Fonts License

[Dave Crossland <dave lab6 com>]

Hi!

On 6 December 2011 09:46, Brendan Molloy <brendan bbqsrc net> wrote:
>
> I am curious as to the provisions limiting the sale of the Font Software
> as defined in the license, which states that it may only be sold within
> a large software package and not alone.
>
> The FAQ states:
> Bitstream is giving away these fonts, but wishes to ensure its
> competitors can't just drop the fonts _as is_ into a font sale system
> and sell them as is.
>
> The "as is" part of the above leads me to believe that if the font is
> modified and renamed, that it may be sold as Font Software.

Well, there is the general intent that is expressed in the FAQ, and
the specific intent for the license text, and the precise wording of
the license text. I believe the specific intent for the license text
is the most important thing, and then the precise wording of the
license text. What is written in the FAQ isn't really all that
relevant.

The license says,

"The Font Software may be sold as part of a larger software package
but no copy of one or more of the Font Software typefaces may be sold
by itself."

I believe this covers modified and renamed copies.

> My question, based on the above two statements, is whether or not a
> modified version of the Font Software under a different name than
> "Bitstream Vera" may be sold without being incorporated into a larger
> software package.

I don't think so, no.

I personally am of the view that this restriction on selling doesn't
meet the criteria of the FSF Free Software Definition, but the
community consensus view is that it is okay because you can include
HelloWorld.c with the fonts and sell that, or you can sell the service
of modifying the fonts and not the fonts themselves to 'get around'
the restriction.

Cheers
Dave