On 7/26/07, GerardM gerard.meijssen@gmail.com wrote:
Hoi, Given that the Wikimedia Foundation has so many people advocating a Free Culture, I would say that retaining a font that has such onerous restrictions for our own logo is really a bit much. There are good quality fonts available and, when these do not exist, I would even favour us to partner with organisations that provide Free licenses like SIL and make fonts available so that our content can be experienced in the way it is intended, free and unencumbered.
I expect that all those who are against the use of Flash, will be in favour of us not using fonts that make our content opaque in the same way that Flash does.
I think I was a bit rash, though, since the Gill Sans font, which is used in the Wikimedia Foundation logo, also has restrictive terms of use by default:
http://www.fonts.com/Legal/MI-EULA.htm
However, Gill Sans MT is easily obtainable with various Microsoft software, kind of like how Hoefler Text is available on Mac OS.
---
I still think switching to Junicode would be a good idea, though, since Junicode is available under the GPL, the developer is active and responsive, it's stylistically (to my untrained eyes, at least) very similar to Hoefler Text and it has nice support for various European characters, even Greek.
--Kjoonlee