> The following are allowed by this agreement; you may:
> 1b. Use the WOFF, WOFF2, and EOT web font formats provided by Process to style text on your websites via the CSS @font-face rule for an unlimited number of websites whose content is controlled by you. You agree to use reasonable measures to ensure the fonts are available only for the process of styling text on websites. At a minimum, and by way of illustration not limitation, reasonable measures include i) preventing unlicensed third-party access, i.e. hotlinking and, ii) not allowing direct download of the fonts unrelated to the process of styling text for your website.
and
> This agreement expressly prohibits the following; you may not:
> 2e. Store or use the fonts in any way that makes them accessible to the public or non-licensed third parties, except where such use is expressly allowed by this Agreement. This includes, but is not limited to, distribution of the fonts through file sharing services and online version control repositories accessible by the public.
https://processtypefoundry.com/help/base/webfont-license-agr...
Seems pretty clear!
It's not clear. How on earth are you supposed to implement ii)?
I'm not interested in answers which mention the Referer header. There are a myriad of factors which can prevent it being sent with the original request required the style elements on the site.
It might also just be: you have to check the referer. If your website has technical issues such that sometimes the referer isn't available, you have to change it so it always is. Or host it on one of the approved third-party hosts referenced in the license.
However a user of yours could just download the font from your web server or record the fight on their phone.
EDIT: TLDR Downloading a publicly available font you don't have a license to use violates copyright.
Same as if you accidentally exposed to the internet your home server of legally-created DVD backups. You'd still be violating the license under which you bought the DVDs.
I would genuinely be interested in case law's stance on this. Also interested in what happens to the value of non-public domain fonts if you require the digital asset to be handled as a secret (and all of the hassle that goes along with that).
There are some pretty sleazy lawyers out there.
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/grandmother-sued-downloading-...
https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2019/07/prenda-law-porn-...
Toomuchtodo you are not an acidental violator after publishing this comment on hn :)
Why would anyone use a non-public domain / CC / open source font in a publicly available project? If the project has an open source license and is in a public repository on Github, why would there even been non-public resources (fonts, icons, images, etc) in the repository at all?
If you have any private resources (code or otherwise) in the repository, it shouldn't be in a public repo to begin with.
Are there any examples of open source projects that are including commercially licensed fonts?
technically the font is just a bunch of 1s and 0s but here we are.
I think what would be useful would be to highlight the many fonts that can be used. E.g Google's open source fonts.
This is just bit coloring again: https://ansuz.sooke.bc.ca/entry/23
> The following are allowed by this agreement; you may:
> 1b. Use the WOFF, WOFF2, and EOT web font formats provided by Process to style text on your websites via the CSS @font-face rule for an unlimited number of websites whose content is controlled by you. You agree to use reasonable measures to ensure the fonts are available only for the process of styling text on websites. At a minimum, and by way of illustration not limitation, reasonable measures include i) preventing unlicensed third-party access, i.e. hotlinking and, ii) not allowing direct download of the fonts unrelated to the process of styling text for your website.
and
> This agreement expressly prohibits the following; you may not:
> 2e. Store or use the fonts in any way that makes them accessible to the public or non-licensed third parties, except where such use is expressly allowed by this Agreement. This includes, but is not limited to, distribution of the fonts through file sharing services and online version control repositories accessible by the public.
https://processtypefoundry.com/help/base/webfont-license-agr...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scalable_Inman_Flash_Replaceme...
As you suspect, there is no practical difference. The difference being perceived is that when you put them on your website, you're doing that for the purpose of displaying text using the font, whereas when you put them on github, the purpose of github is file sharing. The first purpose is good, the second purpose is bad, so the first use should be allowed and the second use shouldn't be, even though -- technically -- they are exactly the same thing. That's just a detail; they're spiritually different.
Unfortunately, this point of view is very much not limited to lawyers; it is how most people think about most things.
The files this article is talking about are not in that format. They are all TTFs, which you can drop into your system’s font directory and use anywhere on your computer.
Also, these TTFs are linked in a public manner rather than being a file whose link is buried deep in the page source where no human is ever intended to see it.
1: or font conversion tools