Re: Noto unified font

From: Luke Dashjr <>
Date: Sun, 9 Oct 2016 06:17:57 +0000

On Sunday, October 09, 2016 4:37:24 AM Philippe Verdy wrote:
> The licence itself says it respects the 4 FSF freedoms. It also explicitly
> allows reselling (rule DFSG #1):

No, it doesn't. That link is just a commentary, and of no relevance to non-
SIL-owned fonts.

The actual license itself begins with the problematic restriction:

    1) Neither the Font Software nor any of its individual components,
    in Original or Modified Versions, may be sold by itself.

> It is not directly compatible with the GPL in a composite product, but with
> LGPL there's no problem,

LGPL doesn't work that way. It allows other software to use it without being
compatible, but any component or dependency of the LGPL'd software must meet
the same requirements as the GPL.

> Really you are challenging the licence for unfair reasons

What unfair reasons are those? My *only* concern is that it is not free.
I don't even care to sell the fonts myself, but simply do not use non-free
software on principle.

Received on Sun Oct 09 2016 - 01:18:44 CDT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Sun Oct 09 2016 - 01:18:45 CDT