I'm reviewing my licensing and currently the Desktop license prohibits 'broadcast use', by which i mean use in tv program titles, film titles/credits and channel identities. However, I'm thinking about the use of the the typefaces in TV advertising and not sure what to do. I expect that most foundries' desktop licenses would permit that. Is that correct?
0
Comments
https://us.v-cdn.net/5019405/uploads/editor/rw/f0kdwtqyjype.gif
I flicked through a few EULAs on our system, it doesn't seem to be so widespread or is non-explicit.
Is your definition of "broadcast use" or some advertising / promotion defined? Otherwise it's one interpretation against another. Another approach is to think about the defined software-use, commercial-use, or static-graphics, with everything prohibited except… [insert here]. This is quite common.
I'm pretty sure I've also seen licenses that permit broadcast use but specifically restrict some technical things, like installing fonts on a chyron system fonts.
Lately the trend has been the opposite, simplifying EULAs and allowing more types of usage. I think it's partially to make customers happy, but I imagine it's also that people just don't want to bother figuring out or negotiating these kinds of things.
This is how I feel as well. Even a simple license is a rough read for most people, and as Jackson mentions, it’s also very difficult to legally define the specific boundaries. I’d love to hear from more foundries.
If you saw your fonts used in the opening of a blockbuster movie that made millions of dollars or saw it on a TV commercial hocking cleanser to millions of viewers throughout the world or if you saw it become the iconic opening credits of a television show via a streaming service, would you feel you're owed any financial compensation for improving somebody elses work product?
If the answer is yes, then you should absolutely write a broadcast use restriction into your EULA. This is something I've included in my EULAs since the late 1990s and it has generated a significant additional source of income for me and my libraries over the course of time. I've never regretted having Broadcast Use restricted in my EULA but I did regret not having it there.
Also, any firm who wants your font will always be happy to pay for it, they know these uses aren't free and you'll still get the exposure for the font but you'll also be fairly compensated for the use.
Many helpful contributions to this subject - thank you all.
Typotheque limits their broadcast license by region, but I think this is problematic since as soon as any audio visual media using the type get on the web it become impossible for the licensee to restrict the regional distribution, and as I understand it the costly worldwide license is then needed. Furthermore I'd be concerned by the annual renewal of the license in the circumstance that such media may be difficult to take down once it's on the web.
Static use = Bitmap images of strings, paragraphs or pages.
Dynamic use = Bitmap images of glyphs, that can be manipulated like a font.
Movement or animation is irrelevant.