[tex-live] Re: non-free fonts

[Roozbeh Pournader]

On Thu, 17 Oct 2002, Thomas Esser wrote:

> I guess this is was related to bitmap fonts, because these connot be
> copyrighted in the US. Things are different for programs and type1 fonts
> (and metafont source files) are considered to be programs as far as
> copyright law is concerned (but I am not a lawyer and might be wrong;
> that's just my understanding of these things).

I am talking a little perpendicular to that, that although the law
considers some fonts to be computer programs, they are not generally like
other pieces of software, and you may not need the freedoms that are 
usual with free software that much, and that a definition of "Free Fonts" 
may be a little broader than "Free Software". That freely redistributable 
but non-modifiable fonts are not as bad as freely redistributable but 
non-modifiable software, even in RMS's mind set.

roozbeh