Romanée – New Release?
Comments
-
I don't know what behooved me to research this further, but I found the official English translation of the Dutch Copyright Act, in which Article 10.1.12, states: “Reproductions of a literary, scientific or artistic work in a modified form, such as translations, arrangements of music, cinematographic and other adaptations and collections of different works shall be protected as separate works, without prejudice to the copyright in the original work.” I would interpret this to be applicable the act of making a digital font based upon one that had been made originally in metal and therefore outside any rights or claims of TEFF or Joh. Enschedé or the heirs of Jan van Krimpen.
At best we are talking about a translation, not a theft or infringement of anyone’s rights. I'm sure there's more to this than what I know, so I return to my original advice: don't fold your tent; hire an attorney.
1 -
Artur Schmal, I just read your remarks and I find them misguided. This is not about evading copyright, but how to evade bullying.1
-
Maybe Frank Martinez, since from what I've learned he recently advised another party concerning a JvK revival. http://www.martinezgroup.com/contact.htmlScott-Martin Kosofsky said:
hire an attorney.0 -
Please, never cite the 1988 decision of the US copyright office without highlighting even more that they dramatically revised that decision in 1992 (arguably reversed it, in effect, for modern digital fonts), just three years and four months later.Scott-Martin Kosofsky said:This University of California Davis law review article, from 2009, offers a pretty good overview of U.S. copyright law in regard to fonts and typeface design, as well as other aspects of U.S. law that bear upon it: https://lawreview.law.ucdavis.edu/issues/43/1/articles/43-1_Lipton.pdf. The 1988 decision of U.S. Copyright Office on the copyrightability of digital typefaces can be read here: https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Policy_Decision_on_Copyrightability_of_Digitized_Typefaces.
8 -
Bullying? I find that a rather hasty assumption to make based on a one sided account of events.Scott-Martin Kosofsky said:This is not about evading copyright, but how to evade bullying.
This is not some David vs Goliath story. This a member of the community taking his problem with another member of the community here to us. He should not be advised in what countries or in what ways TEFF or JvK's heirs can or can not make any claims. He should be advised to settle it between them and if it doesn't work out the way he would like, bad luck, move on.
6 -
Excellent advice. Hire an expensive American lawyer for a dispute between two non-US parties.Hrant H. Papazian said:
Maybe Frank Martinez, since from what I've learned he recently advised another party concerning a JvK revival. http://www.martinezgroup.com/contact.htmlScott-Martin Kosofsky said:
hire an attorney.4 -
I didn't realise graphic designers out there were grinding their teeth waiting to spend their monies on JvK revivals. Or even knew who he was.
Seriously, I'd just avoid doing pure revivals altogether. Take the inspiration from the past, and add your own twist to make something for today. I'm sure it's more interesting for the potential users and more rewarding for the designer. What's the point of setting 2018 books in 1920s typefaces?
Even for a book that would specifically address that period of dutch history, I'd argue that a contemporary take would be more appropriate… except for the very rare case where the designer wants to make the book look old.
Let the people who want to fight for rights to names and designs from the past do their thing. They invested time and capital in acquiring those… I'd let them have that. Looking at serif typefaces that sell today, I'd say it's a waste of time and money anyway. Life's too short for suche hassle. Instead, spend a day thinking of a name that has more marketing power than "Romanée" (not too difficult), and a few more days on how the design can be turned into a contemporary thing of its own.
For the culture of typography, there's always books, wikipedia, flickr and nostalgic blog posts.
Just my 2¢ of course.
5 -
Don't be so deep in Gollum Mode that you fail to pay attention. Re-read the third post in the thread: "Why don’t you create a U.S. corporation or make a partnership agreement with a U.S. typefoundry?" Although Ralph Unger is in Germany and his Lutetia has been selling for years. And then there's Eros, which is a revival of De Does, who's not as dead as JvK. (Did you miss those too?)Paul van der Laan said:
Excellent advice. Hire an expensive American lawyer for a dispute between two non-US parties.
But as I've said, if you can avoid a lawyer you'll add years to your life.
BTW since you're here it's worth asking: was anything said to Königsdorfer during his time at KABK about eventually releasing or not releasing this?
Excellent advice. Hence my Caped Craftaider cartoon above.ybaggar said:I'd just avoid doing pure revivals altogether.
For better or worse though I think there is a market for such things. Especially in this age of nostalgia.
Reromanée!ybaggar said:spend a day thinking of a name that has more marketing power than "Romanée"
-2 -
BTW is there a reason certain people attack me but never Scott-Martin who is saying similar things? (Rhetorical question.)
-2 -
And then there's Eros, which is a revival of De Does, who's not as dead as JvK. (Did you miss those too?)
You've brought this up multiple times, but Eros was discussed/critized upon release and you know it, so I don't understand the point you're trying to make. Absence of actual legal actions? I'd say it's a good thing that people can openly criticize a project without clamoring for lawyers to enter the game.For better or worse though I think there is a market for such things. Especially in this age of nostalgia.
Examples on the market?
Selling nostalgia or what might seem closer to a time machine is not the same thing (I'm speaking in general terms here, haven't really looked at the design of the discussed revival).
Marketing a serif typeface is always pretty difficult I think. As a foundry founder, my gut feeling says a JvK revival would interest mostly somewhat olders book designers and small studios working on simple typographical projects in need of a classic look. In font economics, that translates to 2-3 styles for 1-5 computers. To make good money on that, the typeface would have to be rather expensive and/or become somewhat/very fashionable.
Even the successful typefaces that could be seen as nostalgic have been presented as very modern designs/interpretations… haven't seen too many revivals flying off the shelves… Didot, Bodoni, Garamond, Fournier & Fleischmann don't count!
To go beyong those kinds of uses, the foundry would have to do a pretty good job reaching bigger clients in a market occupied, amongst others, by teff and DTL, two long-time established foundries renowned for the quality of their work, and Adobe, MT, two foundries/distributors with giant reach and marketing power.
Even without the hassle of possible legal troubles, or reputation damage, I'd say: good luck with that.Reromanée!
I raise you with Renomanée (don't do it lol)
2 -
Yes, the absence of legal action (well, as far as we know, since unlike Ralph Unger's Lutetia it's pretty recent, and court systems like to take their sweet time to milk us more) is significant... and somehow remains ignored by certain people in this thread... If TEFF does not confront Sharp Type, are its JvK threats not merely a scare tactic? Part of me actually hopes that's not true, because to me that's just as bad as plagiarism.ybaggar said:
I don't understand the point you're trying to make. Absence of actual legal actions? I'd say it's a good thing
I have a hunch that Eros was a bridge too far, and we might end up hearing things, but the JvK stuff is too hard to enforce. Hence Unger (in Germany, mind you) selling his Lutetia since 2014.
Hey, I personally agree that the lack of legal action is a good thing. But do you think everybody in this thread agrees? I think one of the people who did a Like on your post would be delighted to see Unger sued into oblivion...
The MyFonts best seller lists? :-/Examples on the market?
Anything that's not from the 20th century is from before the invention of printing...
Makes sense.To make good money on that, the typeface would have to be rather expensive and/or become somewhat/very fashionable.
:-)Renomanée
Actually I found the perfect name. Perfect. And I very rarely use that word. I've been smiling about it since yesterday.-1 -
What you call scare tactics I see as the course of action most non-millionaire non-litigious foundries would take when considering to be in their rights, while not wanting to spend their energy and money attacking colleagues in courts. Even for "business-orientated" type designers, taking someone to court is not fun.
I'd remind that we've only heard the account of one party. And that account doesn't present proof of what I would consider "scare tactics", only the affirmation of their legal rights.
Just because the other party is not willing to discuss things in an open forum doesn't make them the automatic bad guys. Innocent people can choose not to speak to la police des polices too.
Presenting these cases as "good guy vs bad guy" is too simplistic. In this industry, most parties are business-orientated. There is as much covetousness from established foundries as there is opportunism and willingness to take shortcuts from up-and-coming type designers (dialectic). And not so much of the idealism that you so vehemently defend. For me I can see both cases, especially when everything is put in context.
--
I think nostalgia doesn't mean the same for you as it does for me. I'm looking at what the design actually conveys, not the creation date (before the invention of printing??).
Neither Din, Helvetica or Franklin convey nostalgia to me. I don't think that is what designers look for when they purchase these fonts. Unlike Brandon maybe, for example.
On top of that, there are only 3 or 4 serifs on that list. I think that just says it all.
Anyway, my point is that nostalgia and "corpses" are not the same. Designing a typeface inspired by Elzevirs probably taps into some nostalgia, it doesn't make a corpse though. Nostalgia is a legitimate feeling designers might want to express. Not every YAG is a corpse, what makes it a corpse or not is the approach and the final design. Does it add something relevant, can you see the author in it, or not. Not every Garamond is nostalgic, the question is how to make it not so.
4 -
-2
-
Although nostalgia is also not really my thing (my last sentence shows my bias), I've gotten to appreciate it as part of the diversity graphic and type design can offer. If designers only did the kind of work I find interesting, it would be a boring and sad world!
When you design a revival but someone already owns the rights to it:
2 -
This forum has seen better days. Time to move on.Hrant H. Papazian said:
Don't be so deep in Gollum Mode that you fail to pay attention.1 -
Since that was only the two of us I assume you mean me?Hrant H. Papazian said:I think one of the people who did a Like on your post would be delighted to see Unger sued into oblivion...
Edit:
I see, no reply, only a silly Insightful mark. It's a pity that you feel the need to resort to juvenile behaviour.
0 -
I don't feel subtlety is juvenile, but OK, if you really need me to be literal: Yes, I meant you.
BTW hey what do you think of the Insightful flag on my post of 8:40AM?-3 -
@Paul van der Laan Try answering questions instead of making evasive remarks and you might just see a big improvement.
And of course Ramiro Espinoza's nasty attack is totally fine with you, because he agrees with you?
-5 -
Take a look at yourself – you are the one who is flooding threads with a handful of mantras, little snide remarks, and questions. This forum has become a monologue again just as Typophile before. You are not interested in real dialogs, you just like the sound of your own voice. And it always needs to be the last one too.Hrant H. Papazian said:@Paul van der Laan Try answering questions instead of making evasive remarks and you might just see a big improvement.
Contrary to what you think I don’t owe you any answer to any of your questions. They are not very interesting to be honest.3 -
Well thank you for coming forth Hrant, but I don't think I have ever suggested I'd like to see someone sued so I wouldn't know why you'd feel the need to state otherwise or even suggest that I'd find pleasure in that.Hrant H. Papazian said:I don't feel subtlety is juvenile, but OK, if you really need me to be literal: Yes, I meant you.BTW hey what do you think of the Insightful flag on my post of 8:40AM?It's not possible to see the time of the post anymore, so I'm not sure which one you mean, but I didn't flag any or your comments in this thread Insightful so what do you what me to say about that?And of course Ramiro Espinoza's nasty attack is totally fine with you, because he agrees with you?As you might notice I only try to use flags on comments that are actually on topic. Not flagging this specific comment doesn't say anything about me approving or disapproving.
I think I have made clear how I feel about taking such an issue to this forum and some of the advice that has been handed out here. Any further irrelevant insinuations I'll leave for what they are.0 -
There is a response system in place. Please downvote or flag comment as off topic if you feel they are, and let the admins handle it.3
-
I'm sad to see this discussion deteriorate to such an extent. It's an interesting subject—to me, at least—with important principles that bear discussion and consideration, and with different points of view that are predicated, in part, on the very different national legal standards of copyright. These are not just matters of law, but also of moral outlook and the balance of property rights versus the legitimacy of interpreting older traditions. I hope we can get it back on track.7
-
False, my stance is simply inconvenient to some. You are pre-disposed to believe that I have nothing to contribute, and clearly engage in favoritism. Look at your own contribution to this thread. What's not interesting is contributing nothing but defensiveness.Paul van der Laan said:
You are not interested in real dialogs
Nevermind having the last word, just have some word beyond undermining select people. Or even better, ask a good question. If you have none, that's a problem. Any teacher knows this.
You don't owe me, but you very much owe us. Not unlike JvK owed his environment for what he produced. Which is the key invalidation of type design protectionism.-4 -
Glad to hear that, I stand corrected.Artur Schmal said:
I don't think I have ever suggested I'd like to see someone sued
@Dyana Weissman @Frode Are none of Paul's posts off-topic, or inappropriate?
-3 -
Hi all,
first of all, thanks for so many comments, hints and opinions. We really appreciate your involvement into the whole story. We informed Peter Matthias Noordzij (TEFF) about this thread, hoping that he will post his view of the case here as well.
One thing about the legal situation: We did ask advice from a lawyer and legally this case seems to be quite clear: TEFF just can’t do anything against a revival as long as someone doesn’t steal the exact outline data. Neither in terms of the type design nor in terms of the name. TEFF registered a »word trademark« in 1992 on the name which expired. Also Monotype’s trademark on »stylized characters« from 1992 ended already. If we would have based the legal situation on a new Romanée release, we’d just done it without discussing this here.
BUT: That is not what our question is about! We want to avoid any legal fights AND also any personal offences to / from TEFF. Our question is about what @Hrant addressed in his comment:
– Is there »a moral right to cultural progress«?
– Is it fair for the originator Jan van Krimpen to withhold his design from the world?
– Would a revival named »Romanée« honour the originator or rather infringe his successors’ claims?
Good or bad guys?
I understand @ybaggar when he sais that this looks like us trying to be the good guys while TEFF prefers not to contribute to this thread. Might be true that this image emerges. Although I can say that this was never our intention. It is also understandable that people who don’t know us presume a commercial background in our post. Yes, we are a business and not a charity society. But everybody who’s into the font retail business knows, that such a project will not fill our cash box. As @Kai wrote: we’d even offer a royalty split.
All in all this is about making a type design available, which we think deserves it. And we were keen on hearing your views about it. So: We’re happy to discuss more if you like.
Oliver
(the other half of Lazydogs...)
2 -
– Is there »a moral right to cultural progress«?
Yes.
Is it fair for the originator Jan van Krimpen to withhold his design from the world?When he was still alive it was. His estate and its licensees withholding the design for decades is unfair.
Would a revival named »Romanée« honour the originator or rather infringe his successors’ claims?I’ll go with honor. It’s more honorable than squatting on the trademark for decades.
2 -
Everything @James Puckett said.0
-
I think when Hrant introduces the term 'cultural progress' into such discussions, he is usually begging the question. Unless one is going to take a kind of act utilitarian, case-by-case basis to considering whether making a particular work available under some particular circumstance constitutes cultural progress, one has to consider broader principles and a longer historical span, because culture is not the business of a moment.
The first question would be whether the principles of intellectual property law are in general good for cultural progress, and I would argue that they have historically been so, at least in the context of civilisations in which land, material goods, and especially capital are held as private property. Leaving out of such law the things that people actually make would not only be illogical but would unfairly advantage the owners of capital even more than they are already.
The second question would be whether typical implementations of intellectual property law are good for cultural progress, and I would say on balance that they tend to be, even though they give rise to situations we don't agree with or, even, that seem to be counter to the principles on which those laws were established. Such laws usually seek to balance the benefit to the makers of things with benefits to the community, and that balance isn't difficult to disrupt.
_____
In considering the case of Romanée and other Dutch type designs in terms of cultural progress, I think that an interesting thing — a culturally interesting thing — happened in The Netherlands in the 1990s. At a time when the rest of the typographic world was rapidly becoming a largely undifferentiated globalised business selling the same things in all markets at generally decreasing prices, some then relatively young Dutch type designers decided to take ownership — both symbolically and practically — of the particular typographic heritage of their particular country, and to establish a local market for high quality and generally more expensive products from that heritage. TEFF was one aspect of this activity; Dutch Type Library was another.
Have those people done everything right? Probably not, but I still think the approach they adopted is an interesting one, and I would suggest that it might even, in the insistence on the distinctiveness of a particular culture, constitute a kind of progress.13 -
Sure. But only up to a point.John Hudson said:whether the principles of intellectual property law are in general good for cultural progress, and I would argue that they have historically been so
As much as the idea of "cultural progress" might seem too rarefied to some, to me in the end it's all about real practice, and figuring out case-by-case who's supporting/impeding it more.
Personally I encourage people to see Law as a means and not an end, and classing moral judgement above it.
It was great, it's just that not all of its potential has been realized, and maybe other people can now contribute to cultural progress better in some cases.I still think the approach they adopted is an interesting one, and I would suggest that it might even, in the insistence on the distinctiveness of a particular culture, constitute a kind of progress.0 -
That is not what I said. I was reacting to hrant who seemed to portray it this way, I didn't said you did.Oliver Linke said:
Good or bad guys?
I understand @ybaggar when he sais that this looks like us trying to be the good guys while TEFF prefers not to contribute to this thread. Might be true that this image emerges. Although I can say that this was never our intention.
Anyway, to me this was a minor aparté since the main point I was making is that cultural progress would be superior if, instead of marketing a revival with the same name, you market a contemporary typeface that draws inspiration from Romanée, but offers more… your own take. It would then not be "Romanée" anymore, and should logically use another name. That would, imo, resolve the legal/ethical matter and be of superior cultural and marketing value.
That is just my take on things and if you disagree I think it's up between you, your moral compass, and teff to find the solution, as the opinions offered here do not represent the type community or society as a whole. Especially when the level of discourse will be diminished by hrant's feeling that debating his views very tiringly and calling people "Gollum" is just being "inconvenient".
8
Categories
- All Categories
- 43 Introductions
- 3.7K Typeface Design
- 800 Font Technology
- 1K Technique and Theory
- 617 Type Business
- 444 Type Design Critiques
- 541 Type Design Software
- 30 Punchcutting
- 136 Lettering and Calligraphy
- 83 Technique and Theory
- 53 Lettering Critiques
- 483 Typography
- 301 History of Typography
- 114 Education
- 68 Resources
- 498 Announcements
- 79 Events
- 105 Job Postings
- 148 Type Releases
- 165 Miscellaneous News
- 269 About TypeDrawers
- 53 TypeDrawers Announcements
- 116 Suggestions and Bug Reports