Re: Better fonts by default?
>>>> "NG" == Neal Gompa
<ngompa13(a)gmail.com> writes:
NG> Most of these fonts look like they are licensed appropriately, the
NG> only problem is the Ubuntu fonts, which have been noted to have a
NG> non-free license[3] (unless someone can get Canonical to fix it).
I had a look at the license at https://www.ubuntu.com/legal/font-licence
and didn't see anything that strikes me as particularly non-free.
The license has a forced renaming requirement for "Modified Versions
which are Substantially Changed", but that kind of thing hasn't rendered
something non-free in the past. The only thing which I've not seen
before is a forced renaming requirement which specifies the name to be
used:
3. Modified Versions which are not Substantially Changed must be renamed
to both
1. retain the name of the Original Version and
2. add additional naming elements to distinguish the Modified Version
from the Original Version. The name of such Modified Versions must be
the name of the Original Version, with "derivative X" where X
represents the name of the new work, appended to that name.
So maybe that's an issue. The font doesn't appear in our list of
licenses (https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing:Main#Font_Licenses)
so I guess it wouldn't hurt to ping the legal list, which I'll do now.
- J<