> [The Microsoft Core Fonts] can''t be included in a Linux distribution, > but anyone can make them available for free as long as the license > is obeyed.AFAIK, they can be distributed, but only verbatim. Hence, a Linux distribution could include them, but would have to cabextract them on the fly. If you''re using Debian, the msttcorefonts package will automatically grab them off the web and configure your system to use them. Juliusz
Around 0 o''clock on Jan 11, Benjamin Rossen wrote:> I happen to have a cupboard of legitimate Windows licenses, from win 95, eight > Win NT 4.0 licenses and more. This makes me a license user of the fonts. I > have moved the fonts from my Windows XP to my RH Fedora 3, with excellent > results; everything in true type.Microsoft released their ''web fonts'' under a free (as in beer) license several years ago and you can find them at http://fontconfig.org/webfonts So, even without a MS license, you can at least get these common fonts specified in web pages. They can''t be included in a Linux distribution, but anyone can make them available for free as long as the license is obeyed. -keith -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 228 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/fontconfig/attachments/20050110/b3d5d59d/attachment.pgp
As I understand it (please correct me if I am wrong) these fonts are not included in GNU/Linux and other Open Source distrubutions because of licensing issues. Presumably, the each distribution should be clean, in the sense that it should only include material that falls under the license used by that distribution. However, if Debian automatically installs these from the web, then it is effectively including them in the distribution. That seems strange to me. Is there some fine legal distinction here which I do not understand? Why shouldn'' t Debian just include the fonts in the distribution? Since we know that there is a Microsoft License attached to these fonts, presumably the user must get a warning before these are installed; something like: "About to install Microsoft Web Fonts. Please read the license and press agree to continue, or skip ... etc." I am using Red Hat and Mandrake, so I do not know what Debian does. If this is the procedure, then what is the difference between including these in the distribution, and taking them from the web? Benjamin Rossen On Tuesday 11 January 2005 13:39, Juliusz Chroboczek wrote:> > [The Microsoft Core Fonts] can''t be included in a Linux distribution, > > but anyone can make them available for free as long as the license > > is obeyed. > > AFAIK, they can be distributed, but only verbatim. Hence, a Linux > distribution could include them, but would have to cabextract them on > the fly. > > If you''re using Debian, the msttcorefonts package will automatically > grab them off the web and configure your system to use them. > > Juliusz > > _______________________________________________ > fontconfig mailing list > fontconfig@lists.freedesktop.org > http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/fontconfig >
> However, if Debian automatically installs these from the web, then > it is effectively including them in the distribution. That seems > strange to me.The Debian msttcorefonts package is not installed by default. In order to get the MS core fonts, the user must: - make a conscious decision to install this optional package; - say ``yes'''' to a question asked by the installer; - after the download, agree to the Microsoft licence.> Presumably, the each distribution should be clean, in the sense that > it should only include material that falls under the license used by > that distribution.Debian is split into three parts: - main, which is entirely DFSG-free; - non-free, which contains things that are freely redistribuable but not DFSG-free; - contrib, which is itself DFSG-free but might depend on non-free components. The msttcorefonts package is in contrib. It would not be suitable for inclusion into main.> Why shouldn'' t Debian just include the fonts in the distribution?In the Debian community, using the Debian infrastructure (ftp mirrors, Debian CDs, etc.) is frowned upon. Making a net-based installer for these fonts allows easy access to them without however using the Debian infrastructure for distributing non-free software. I believe that from a legal point of view, it should be okay to distribute these fonts (in the form of Microsoft cabinet files) as part of your distribution. I suggest that you check with a lawyer, though. Juliusz P.S. Keith, this is off-topic for this list. Please complain if you want us to take this discussion off list.
Getting many ttf fonts into Linux Pardon me if this is an old idea; it is a new one to me, provided a welcome solution to the font problem in Linux, and may be interesting for others to try. I happen to have a cupboard of legitimate Windows licenses, from win 95, eight Win NT 4.0 licenses and more. This makes me a license user of the fonts. I have moved the fonts from my Windows XP to my RH Fedora 3, with excellent results; everything in true type. Because many web site developers specify font names in their HTML or CSS, and these are often Windows font names, these sites do not render well in Linux with no more than open source fonts. If you don''t have an Windows license, you can often get an old license very cheaply. It is ofen possible to get one from people who are dumping old machines. At the annual computer expo in Eindhoven (near where I live), there are many dealers dumping old software. Old Windows packets can be purchased for a few tens of Euros. I suppose, if you want to have a legitimate license before using the Windows fonts, this is probably the cheapest way to do this. Benjamin