this post was submitted on 07 Jul 2024
75 points (98.7% liked)
Linux
5222 readers
6 users here now
A community for everything relating to the linux operating system
Also check out [email protected]
Original icon base courtesy of [email protected] and The GIMP
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
How is this an OSI-approved license when you're not allowed to sell the font itself?
I haven't found much of a convincing explanation, but here's the OSI meeting notes from when it was approved:
Source: https://opensource.org/meeting-minutes/minutes20090401
And I'm guessing, this is one of the Bitstream fonts that they're talking about: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bitstream_Vera#Licensing_and_expansion
Certainly seems a bit at odds with the OSD to me:
Source: https://opensource.org/osd
I kind of agree that I don't care as much. There's not as much need for modifying a font, because it fundamentally cannot do as much as a program. And if a modification becomes necessary, that's not going to need as much budget, so there's not as much need for being allowed to sell it.
But at the same time, it's not like the OSI is the judge over good vs. bad. Certainly would like to know Matt Flaschen's thoughts why this fits the OSD...