On 7/26/07, GerardM <gerard.meijssen(a)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