From: V. M. Kumaraswamy (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Tue Jun 01 2010 - 11:50:33 CDT
On Tue, Jun 1, 2010 at 8:43 AM, <email@example.com> wrote:
>I'm not sure what you mean here... What you call "Unicode" font
>is a font including the glyphs scanned from the book "Unicode
What I mean is one of the font devloper has stolen GLYPHS of another font
which were available on the website and developed his font without taking
permission or even informing the owner of the font. This font was selling to
general public for an amount. People were buying this font for their use.
Now the developer who did the font, is giving it to public as free
fonts, saying that he developed the font. Now the developer publishes that
fonts are Uniocde fonts on developer website. Is this can be done ??
Unicode Consortium need to think about these kind of things that are
happenning. That is stealing of IPR of others.
> I think ISO/IEC 10646 and Unicode standards are basically
> designed to be independent with specific font & rendering
> technology, although sometimes specific font formats (like
> OpenType) are mentioned in the discussion about the possibility
> of the implementation for the proposed encoding mechanism.
> In addition, OpenType is one of the most popular font format
> to implement the complex text rendering for Unicode, and now
> it is standardized as ISO/IEC 14496-22, but its language/script
> dependent part is not a part of ISO. The specification is
> published by Microsoft, and it is free for the developers
> to follow it (to use Microsoft's Unicode rendering system)
> or to create their own specification to use their own rendering
> On Tue, 1 Jun 2010 07:57:33 -0700
> "V. M. Kumaraswamy" <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> >Some font vendors say and publish on their website that their fonts are
> >Unicode fonts.
> Yes, but... do you want Unicode Consortium to prohibit to
> use "Unicode" in the opaque advertisement phrases?
> In CJK area, some font vendors call their new products as
> Unicode fonts, because their legacy products supported legacy
> encodings (e.g. Shift-JIS, GB2312/GBK, Big5, Wansung etc).
> Some consumers think they are deceived because they wanted
> to buy a font supporting all CJK Ideographs in latest Unicode
> but the characters in the font are almost same with those
> covered by legacy encodings.
> >Some of these fonts are developed by stealing GLYPHS of some similar fonts
> >whcih were available on the website. [that is: IPR stolen fonts]
> I'm not sure what you mean here... What you call "Unicode" font
> is a font including the glyphs scanned from the book "Unicode
> >On Tue, Jun 1, 2010 at 7:11 AM, Doug Ewell <email@example.com> wrote:
> >> V. M. Kumaraswamy wrote:
> >> The Unicode Consortium is the publisher of The Unicode Standard as well
> >>>> as several other technical standards.
> >>> So Unicode Consortium publishes standards for fonts ?
> >>> The Unicode Standrad is for fonts that are used in different countries
> >> No, Asmus did not say that the Unicode Standard is a font standard. It
> >> not. It is a character standard, which is a different thing because the
> >> identity of a character is not the same as the images of that character
> >> displayed in any given font.
> >> The Unicode Consortium publishes charts showing representative examples
> >> what each character looks like, for purposes of identifying the
> >> The exact images are not normative, nor are the fonts used to generate
> >> charts.
> >> The Unicode Standard especially does not specify anything about "fonts
> >> are used in different countries." Font vendors, or countries if they
> >> the ones who dictate what fonts may be used, may choose any fonts they
> >> --
> >> Doug Ewell | Thornton, Colorado, USA | http://www.ewellic.org
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Jun 01 2010 - 11:52:51 CDT