TypeDrawers in the NY Times

[Deleted User]
[Deleted User] Posts: 0
in Type Business
The user and all related content has been deleted.

Comments

  • Marc Oxborrow
    Marc Oxborrow Posts: 220
    As general-interest type articles go, I thought this was well-written. The distinctions between typeface and font, the definition of "x-height," and the descriptions of individual characters were all reasonably clear and accurate.
  • Hrant Հրանդ Փափազեան Papazian
    Hrant Հրանդ Փափազեան Papazian Posts: 2,044
    I guess lack of courage and imagination is relative.
  • JoyceKetterer
    JoyceKetterer Posts: 805
    I'm impressed that the article mostly got licensing right, and amused that Goldman Sacks "quietly changed the EULA"
  • Hrant Հրանդ Փափազեան Papazian
    Hrant Հրանդ Փափազեան Papazian Posts: 2,044
    edited August 2020
    The PR pretense of libre type being caught with its pants down.
  • JoyceKetterer
    JoyceKetterer Posts: 805
    @Hrant H. Papazian I suspect they wanted it to be broadly usable so they wouldn't have to think about license enforcement when people "inevitably used"  their "beautiful font".  Then out of reflex their lawyer wrote their own EULA (in my experience less adroit lawyers are more comfortable writing things themselves than working with someone else's language).  This sequence of choices was supposed to make life easier and they just stumbled into the PR debacle that was the non disparagement clause because that sort of thing is totally normal in other contexts.  

Categories