209
Japanese game developers face ridiculously high font license fees following US acquisition of major domestic provider. Live-service games to take the biggest blow (automaton-media.com)
submitted 9 months ago by to c/games@sh.itjust.works
103 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 10 points 9 months ago* (6 children)

Font and alphabet are not the same thing.

Obviously nobody can or should own the letter E, but you pretend that the font creator's work adds nothing to that.

Someone had to do the work to make it look nice, beyond just being an E.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] -5 points 9 months ago (5 children)

    That is artwork inspired by the letter "E", representing the letter E plus additional elements. It's not correct to say that it is the letter E.

    Now open a word processor, choose a font, hold your Shift key and tap the E key. What you'll see on your screen is not "inspired by" the letter E nor does it represent the letter E. It IS the letter E. Therein lies the difference.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] 14 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (4 children)

    I chose a very extreme example, but it's still just a stylized E, used for text. My word processor also has lots of different E's to choose from, all stylized differently.

    nor does it represent the letter E. It IS the letter E.

    I have E's that have serifs. The concept of letter E doesn't say anything about that, but some fonts have them and others don't.

    Where do you draw the line? Serifs? Embossing? Floral motifs?

    I designed a stylized E. Which side of the line does it belong?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] -4 points 9 months ago (2 children)

    Just because a category is fuzzy doesn't make it invalid. That's whynwe have laws to force standardized definitions of various concepts. You arguing against whatever definition I proposed would indict only that definition, and not the broader concept that there is an important line to begin with.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 10 points 9 months ago (1 child)

    So, as far as I can tell, your arguments are that that a normal font is nothing more than the alphabet, therefore there's no art in it, and therefore the creator shouldn't have any claim to it.

    My argument is that every detail is an artistic choice, and that simply making it look aesthetically pleasing or distinctive is art. If fonts weren't art, why would people even bother with different looking fonts?

    But regardless of the art question, if the creator can't license their fonts, it would mean that they get no compensation for when some company uses their work.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •