My Little Pony toymaker sued over alleged font misuse – BBC News
Illegally Used Font Could Result in Lawsuit for British Government
Mixpanel sued for $2.0 million over font in shared Tumblr theme
Madrid 2020 paid 1,500 euros to the designer whose font used without permission
NBC Universal sued for $3.5 million for font license infringement
Rick Santorum’s Website Using Pirated Font Leads to $2 Million Lawsuit
Microsoft sued for $1.4 million for font copyright violation
TBS and Titleboy Films sued for font license infringement for Falling Skies promotional materials
These articles and cases help get the word out that it's illegal to use most fonts without, first, obtaining licenses to do so, and that it's not all that different from using photos, music, books, video or other kinds of software.
It's good when the public is shown that font piracy is real, that we take it seriously and that legal penalties can come from ignoring this. I think most people, when it's spelled out to them, agree that it's not at all unreasonable for people to be paid for their work. There's not a whole lot wrong with PR that results in some respect.
First, violating a contract is not quite the same as breaking the law, so how about not throwing around the word "illegal" haphazardly?
Second, my goal is to sell retail font licenses to the largest range of people possible. If all the entities with deep pockets are afraid to use a font that has a license I loose. But not just me, our industry looses.
I can work with license violators. I can't work with people who refuse to engage. I think you're being very short sighted.
“It’s worth noting that Jonathan Hoefler, founder of the Hoefler&Co type foundry that designed and owns the Gotham font, says that the company has “never quoted a client anything close to a million dollars for anything.” He adds, “most of our clients find that they’re better served by licensing an existing font than creating a new one, and cost is a major factor in that decision.”
@Dave Crossland, where's that picture you took of the pricing on myfonts if you dial everything up to the max?
I would note that these same companies pay millions for all sorts of other licenses without blinking. It's just what happens at scale. And if your only reason for commissioning a font is to avoid having a license then that's not a sufficient reason to make a new thing. The issue here is that they a) under value fonts b) are afraid of the font licensing because our industry has fail to instill trust.
You seem to assume there could be a large rush by many major companies to commission their own in-house, privately owned fonts that they will use to the exclusion of everything else. Honestly, I just don't see this happening on a scale that will make an appreciable difference. What I see, instead, are far more companies paying more attention to and being more conscientious about their licenses and policing their fonts.
Just a couple of weeks ago, I sold a license for several thousand copies of a font family to a large company. They have dozens of different products — each with its own standardized branding. They will always need licensed fonts in addition to their corporate face.
And so what if a handful of huge, billion-dollar companies, like IBM or Netscape, commission an in-house face for their corporate branding. I'm not at all sure I'd rather see, say, Monotype getting the revenue for their corporate typeface licenses than I would an individual designer being paid up front for a custom design. And I'm also less than convinced that avoiding licensing issues is typically these company's only (or even primary) reason for wanting a unique typeface anyway.
Speaking of shortsightedness, I can't see where it's anything but shortsighted to think that articles informing the public about the legalities, penalties and risks associated with using or distributing fonts without a valid license to do so is a bad thing. Apparently, those foundries and distributors filing these lawsuits aren't too concerned about it either.
Even when the issue is a civil suit against a corporation for a licensing violation, articles in the media about it drive home the message to the public (and businesses) that designers need to be paid for their work, which as I've said, is an unambiguously good thing.
It appears that the image you are looking for can be found in this thread: (In your opinion, what are the key advantages for an exclusive corporate typeface?).
While Dave calculated $3.7 trillion to license Helvetica, he also wrote:
I'd agree with both of these. It can feel like senior managers are playing a game of cat-and-mouse. On the one hand, a business might "hide" parts of their font misuse whilst simultaneously working towards an alternative. There's a widescale lack of knowledge and understanding, hence (1) devaluing the font product, until a business is subject to legal fine = (2) distrust, because it's very difficult to manage the font permissions of a business with multiple, poorly tracked, divergent, outputs… worldwide.
Who wants to own that risk?