It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.
Fonts are software.The CCC doesn’t appear to include that under its umbrella.
Though it is, in a way, off-topic, I think that David Byrne's editorial is relevant for font makers. It has been discussed before — whether or not a future in which most fonts are served from the cloud by a Spotify-like subscription service, is a good thing for font makers. The pro and contra arguments from those discussions can be found in David Byrne's editorial. I think Byrne's case against a Spotify-like subscription service is convincing. Only the owners of such a service, and the most successful content creators which participate in it, will receive a significant financial return from it — everyone else will not.
My conclusion is: If you, as a font maker, participate in a very big Spotify-like subscription service for fonts which are served from the cloud, both as webfonts and desktop fonts — you may be supporting the establishment of a monopoly-like service which will, in time, cannibalize the revenues from your other sales channels.
The CCC doesn’t appear to include that under its umbrella.
As part-tool, part content, fonts have been able to avoid many of the problems that beset other royalty-based passive income creative “products”, speciﬁcally pictures and music.
However, Ben may be right about the cannibalizing.
Maybe the CCC doesn't include fonts under its umbrella because no font-makers have come forward asking to take part.