Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Stuart Sandler


Stuart Sandler
Last Active
Member, Type Person
Invited by
Admin James Puckett
  • Re: First font license

    Be aware it's always best to err on the side of more restrictive EULA than less restrictive one as customers always assume with rose colored glasses, if something isn't expressly restricted it must otherwise be granted. Feel free to look at our EULA for ideas of things you may wish to consider restricting:

  • Re: Anybody else want to commission a open source Wordpress type tester?

    Hi Roel! As you can see we're exploring the concept which means your client in this case is a committee. I may suggest you start a more private discussion thread solely for those who are committed financially to participating instead of trying to distill feedback from those who aren't.

    Beyond that, it would be great to learn more about your organization and similar projects you've done to what we're discussion.
  • Re: Anybody else want to commission a open source Wordpress type tester?

    Malcolm is 100% correct however that doesn't make WordPress any easier to use OR make the code it produces any cleaner. Also as James mentioned, there aren't really easy tools that exist for font sellers specifically.

    There is the issue of using the same download to support dynamic multi-user pricing when the quantity of the product remains one yet the variable that controls pricing isn't fixed.

    There is no way to easily offer all the types of licenses one would want to sell or web font and desktop font downloads without setting up a different product for each package.

    We're perhaps too small of an industry to have our own specific suite of WordPress tools, but I do like James idea that we could chip in and share costs to have a WordPress plugin developer create these tools so it's one-click easy to get a really nice testdriver or licensing modifier, etc . . .
  • Re: Online shops and language

    I also look at this exercise firstly as finding the most common ground that virtually all EULAs agree on, things like no modifications, governing law (location non-specific), indemnification, definition of ownership, etc in the hopes this can serve as a universal base for what could become the springboard to where variations begin.

    Beyond that, I think that is where we can start to define different silos of variation and categorize them accordingly.

    I also believe this can be language agnostic if the intent of each term is what is captured and measured.
  • Re: Online shops and language

    It's time to look at a 2015 (16) version of this because I think it could become a very valuable tool in creating a more or less crowdsourced single (The One) EULA. Honestly, I talk with more folks who want a fair and clear EULA for buyers and sellers and this seems like an effort that could be possible if we look at it objectively and transparently.