746 posts    Identified fonts    Requests only

Posts by metaphasebrothel

Don't ever try to change the name of an installed font by renaming it in the installed directory. You will permanently damage the font. For one thing, the panagram sentence at different point sizes will no longer be displayed, if you open the font in preview. I don't know what other damage would be done, but that's reason enough to not do it.

There is a way to do it, with Windows XP, but I don't know if this procedure would work with other operating systems.

For example, in my installed Windows fonts, the font named Bodoni MT Condensed Bold Italic has file name BOD_CBI.TTF, and I want the font name and the file name to be the same.

This is what I would do:

1) Open Windows Search, browse for the directory C:\WINDOWS\Fonts, and click the Search button. I want the search results to show the contents of the installed fonts folder in the operating system.

2) Select and copy any fonts which I want to rename, and paste them into a new folder, created somewhere other than the Operating System, or Program Files.

3) In the new folder, right-click and rename the font file name(s).

4) Delete the installed font.

5)Select/ copy the renamed font)s), and paste it/them into C:\WINDOWS\Fonts.

When I did this on a previous computer, I could not chance the file names of Tahoma, Microsoft Sans Serif, or the font currently selected for Notepad.exe. TheTahomafile name can't be changed, even from all caps to regular spelling, because Tahoma is the font used for Windows XP file names and default display. You would potentially do major damage to your computer, if [b]Tahoma is uninstalled, even briefly. This would likely apply to a different font, instead of, or in addition to Tahoma, if later operating systems have a different text display font.

I was able to change the names of every other font, except the three noted above. I have no idea whether or how this can be done with Windows Operating Systems after XP. Pwerhaps someone else could enlighten us on that.

Feb 06, 2015 at 00:46  [reply]  Illegal use of font

hanoded, I downloaded some of your fonts, and I stand corrected. A few of your fonts, notably DK Jambo, DK Carte Blanche and Moonlight Shadow are very well designed.

DK Sleepy Time is not. It's a deviantart font, and not a good one. You should not have been sufficiently satisfied with it to put your name on it. Your entire catalog suffers, when you drop a turd like that one.

I look at a few vectors in a font editor. I like the curves in D K Jambo. The DK Sleepy Time vectors appear to have had little of no editing done to them. The line widths are wildly inconsistent. It sullies the reputation you've built with your other fonts.

Edited 2 times. Last edit on Feb 06, 2015 at 00:58 by metaphasebrothel

Feb 05, 2015 at 04:00  [reply]  Illegal use of font

@honoded: Props to you! If you regularly receive large donations, I'm happy to hear that.

Keep in mind that this thread is about the circumstances of intellectual property theft, and not only about your specific situation. When another designer on DaFont encounters this same problem, they be instructed to read this thread, so we wont have to write these long replies more than once.

To keep the discussion lively, it was necessary for someone to play Devil's Advocate, in which opinions that are not entirely supportive are also expressed.

There are also cases where some forum members have fabricated stories, for personal amusement. A portion of some of my posts was directed to those situations, and not to you specifically.

Certain statements I made should be read and understood by anyone marketing a font that's freely downloadable, but has a fee for commercial use:

1) Make sure the terms of commercial use are included in the font file.

2) Allowing the commercial use fee to be determined by the user is naive. It assumes that most people will give fair value for fair value.

3) Nobody should be designing amateur or semi professional fonts with profit as the primary motive. Good quality fonts can earn significant income for a designer. Good quality takes time. Some designers are capable of designing good quality fonts, and some aren't. Spending more time on each font, rather than trying to make as many fonts as possible, is a better strategy.

4) There is no correlation whatsoever between DaFont download statistics and potential licensing opportunities. If a font has 1,000,000 downloads, that doesn't mean 1,000,000 different people have downloaded it. Many people will have downloaded the font more than once. Sometimes the author does that, to have their font appear to be more popular than it actual is.

5) There is no direct correlation between the popularity of a font, in terms of download stats, and its potential to generate income. A lot of people just collect fonts as a hobby. They download from DaFont, because the fonts can be obtained for free. If there was any fee applied, however small the fee would be, they would not. Many downloaded fonts are never extracted from their .zip file, and of those that have been extracted, a smaller percentage are ever installed, or actually used in any graphic design, as a percentage of the total number of downloads. I have Gigabytes of unextracted font .zip files. Many other people do, too.

6) When a font is made hastily, it often has a usable range between 36 and 72 points. Any smaller, and the display will become muddy. Any larger, and the errors will be magnified. If a designer makes a font that is average in terms of design and technical execution, he/she is competing against all the other average fonts, and all of the free fonts, for a limited purchasing market. When a font is above average, or excellent, in terms of design and technical skill, the number of competing fonts is much smaller. You have a better chance of generating income by making better quality fonts than you do by making a large quantity of average fonts, and hoping that a few people will be overly generous.

hanoded, I do apologize for disparaging remarks about the quality of some of your designs. Those remarks were not directed specifically at you, but to all of the designers who could make their fonts better, before submitting them. You have several very good fonts. You have many that are average. Some are below average. I didn't see one that I could call great.

You could make one or more great fonts. You have no reason to make any more average or below average fonts. Leave that market to the designers who aren't capable of making a great font yet, or ever. Make your work more valuable than $10, for commercial use. That way, everyone will benefit.


I never say anything negative about a 100% free font, regardless of the quality. It's only when a commercial use fee is applied that I register an opinion. All of my own font releases have been 100% free, in part because I use the fair use provision of copyright law frequently, and because I don't see much commercial potential from my dingbat fonts. I believe that all of my fonts are more valuable that the disk space they would occupy on a hard drive. I would download most or all of them, if they had been made by someone else. I would not pay any money to download any of them, nor would I pay money to use them commercially. They're just my gift back to the design community, for free fonts that other people have made, and I have enjoyed.

Each designer who submits a font that has a commercial use fee should ask themselves that one question: "Would I pay money to use this font, if it had been made my someone else; ie: is it better than a similar font, that is free for all use?". If your answer to yourself is yes, then your business model is sound. If the answer to yourself is no, then you should improve the font, to the point where your answer will be yes,or not make the font in the first place, or make it free for all use. All fonts should be worthy of charging a fee for commercial use, before a fee is charged for such use.

Best regards,


Feb 04, 2015 at 19:57  [reply]  Illegal use of font

Thanks, toto@k22. I, personally, never accept advanced payment for any creative project, because I'm not good at meeting someone else' time frame for completion, and I don't want to have to give the money back, if I don't finish the work.

koeiekat said  
The grunge effect is not made with a font editor.

In theory, some grunge effects could be made with a font editor. It may be easier, or more time efficient to use a graphic design program, but this thread is about 'on the cheap' font design.

For example, in ScanFont 3, I could draw some contours within the glyph window, drag them onto an existing contour, and reverse the newly added contour(s), to create 'white on a black background', in print. That can probably be done with other font editors, as well.

I got it using eMule in 2006, but It's necessary to have a computer that has Windows XP, is not connected to the Internet, and has no Windows updates after January, 2014 to still be able to use it.

It cost me $140 Canadian, from my repairman. It's a 'flat tower' model, with a floppy disk drive, that fits under my monitor, but it processes very quickly, without the Internet hogging CPU resources. I just have to use a flash drive to move files between the computers, because I'd have to connect both to the Internet, to put them on a LAN.

My ScanFont 3 is a cracked version of the demo that was available for free download on the Fontlab home page for many years. It cost me about 14 MB of bandwidth, so I don't think anyone will find a less expensive font editor, unless their download doesn't include the .pdf manual.

Fontlab doesn't even sell ScanFont 3 anymore. There is no truth to the rumour that Windows Vista was created specifically to prevent people from making fonts with ScanFont 3, but a Windows automatic update in February, 2014 may have possibly had that purpose.

I've only ever known of two other font authors who have fonts hosted at Dafont and have made fonts with ScanFont 3. One of them doesn't make fonts anymore, but the two she did make were very popular. The other designer uses a different font editor now.

Menhir said  
Font Forge (free)
Type Tools ($48)
Font Creator ($80)

For me, I use an old version of Type Tools.

Have you made any fonts, Menhir, or do you use a font editor only to study fonts made by other people?

Feb 04, 2015 at 17:37  [reply]  Illegal use of font

koeiekat said  
Bobby, David carefully and rightfully did not give the names of the agency and client when he asked to how to take a case like this further. David wanted to know how to handle in a case like this that is all. When David follows my suggestion he will have his money in no time.

This is acceptable. You've offered hanoded assistance privately, he's taken your advice, and you are confident that his grievance will be satisfied.

My posts related to public assistance, through this forum, and I stand by my opinions. This sort of inquiry comes up frequently in DaFont forums, including a recent complaint from Des Gomez involving the Cookie Chips font, being used on some T-Shirts sold at Target stores.

Keep in mind that my responses in this thread are not all specifically directed to hanoded. They're also meant to be read by other authors who have fonts hosted by DaFont, or people who might design fonts at a future date.

For any font that isn't 100% free for all use, the terms of commercial use need to be included in the internal copyright and licensing fields, if the author may need the assistance of the legal system. Whether or not that information is displayed when the font is opened in preview is irrelevant.

I'll bet if someone made a formal complaint, through the proper channels, against Microsoft, for neglecting to display the header information, when a font is opened in preview, with an operating system more recent than Windows XP, there would probably be some Windows update that would correct this oversight.

I have no direct knowledge of which Operating Systems do not display the 'header', when a font is opened in preview. I do know that this information is displayed, when Windows XP is used. I do know that this information is not displayed, when Windows 7 is used.

There's a legal term called ignoratia juris non excusat, ("Ignorance of the law is no excuse"). This concept has been in place in all responsible law codes, since the Code of Hammurabi, c. 1754 BCE. It's binding to both parties.

If the font author does not include the commercial use terms within the font file, the law will not reward him for his negligence, even if that information was included in a notation orsupplemental file.

If the terms of commercial use are included in the header and copyright/ licensing fields, it is legally irrelevant whether the commercial user is aware that the information is contained in the file, but not easily displayed.

The law would deal differently between the individual who was aware of the terms of use, but ignored them, and the individual who assumes that there is no fee for commercial use, because they are unaware of such a fee. ("With or without prejudice")

The onus is on the font author to protect his/ her own work. Law is, by nature, necessarily dispassionate. It cannot be sympathetic towards an author who is guilty of having too much faith in the moral integrity of strangers.

methom said  

metaphasebrothel, thanks for the interesting legal explanation. I'm a real newbee to dafonts and actually I should have included the whole readme in the fontfile itself. (But even there it can be removed easyly, if people just don't care about what they're doing.) I designed several "professional" fonts in the past and I always refused to manage the legal stuff, since there are foundries who earn enough money selling my fonts, so they have to handle this for me accurately. At dafonts I just made an early work available, since it otherwise would have not been released at all. But when it comes to the "real world" ... well ... :]

You shouldn't need to include the whole read me in the font file. You only need to indicate that a fee is applicable, and you need to provide contact information for commercial use inquiries.

One problem with that, however, is that some of that contact information will be displayed in search engine results, and if you include an e-mail address, you'll expect to receive spam e-mails for penis enlargement pills, romantic offers from girls in Russia, phishing attempts, and money scam schemes from Nigeria and Burkina Faso. It's a good idea to set up an e-mail address that's solely for commercial use inquiries about your fonts.

All inquiries about my free fonts go to a hotmail address, and I just delete a lot of the spam that comes with it, but for any fonts that I make that are not 100% free, I use a different contact address.

Within the font file itself, you just need to establish that the font is not free for all use, and give an inquiry address, and the law will be on your side. If you are careless in your responsibilities, the law has no obligation to be sympathetic towards you.

Feb 04, 2015 at 13:43  [reply]  Illegal use of font

@ toto@k22: re: #14: I totally agree with the shaming through Social Media. I would suggest inserting a video link from YouTube to the song Shame, Shame, Shame, a 1975 R 'n' B/ disco hit by Shirley and Company.

"In the case of Pablo Impallari, his fonts are released through Google fonts. Those are actually commissioned fonts and he was already paid for those fonts."]

I'm a bit confused by the phrasing. You make it sound like Pablo works for Google. It's my understanding that he works for himself, and Google pays him for the privilege of having his work included in the Google fonts catalog. He may receive a fee from Google upon completion of a font, based on his past reputation, (ie: hypothetically, Google agrees, in advance, that they will purchase new fonts made by Pablo), but that's not really a commissioned work. Google is just one of the clients who are generous in their donation amount, or perhaps he had negotiated a reasonable fee from Google?

At the same time, your knowledge of the typography industry far exceeds my own. If you know facts about that arrangement, perhaps you would advise me by private message?

I know dick about Google Fonts, because they aren't interested in dingbats, but Google has deep pockets, so if, at a future date, they wanted to use a font designed by me, I would expect them to compensate me, at a fee level I deem to be acceptable. In certain circumstances, it could be to the font author's advantage, to deny Google's request. People are sick of Lobster, because it is so ubiquitous, (seen everywhere). Certain fonts can generate more income by the fact that they are used commercially as seldom as possible.

In effect, is it the case that an association with Google Fonts can be seen as Google donating, in advance, on behalf of the commercial use clients who obtain the font through Google Fonts? Do Google fonts users need to donate to Pablo, for commercial use, or does the donation made by Google to Pablo effectively make the font free to use, without additional required donation, to anyone who obtains use through Google Fonts, as opposed to from a download on the author's home page, or from a font hosting site, such as DaFont?

If you could tell us what you know about a contract with Google Fonts, I would be personally very interested, and I'd think many of the other readers would be, too. I would think a font author might or might not want to be in partnership with Google. Thanks!

@ koeiekat: My comments about the quality of hanoded's work relates to the fact that obtaining a commercial use fee of any significant amount for the use of his fonts is unlikely. Trying to chase down $10 lost here and there is not effective, in terms of time and effort.

If hanoded likes the idea of the shaming campaign, he should begin here, by posting the name of the company, and an image of the alleged copyright infringement.

To date, however, he has provided no evidence; he hasn't named the font, nor the company allegedly using his font without authorization. I'm all for supporting the possibility of a smear campaign, to obtain a higher than usual commercial fee, based on the disrespect shown to him, but at this point, he should show US some proof of his allegations, otherwise this could just be a self promotion thread. Big companies generally do not risk bad publicity to save $10. Big companies generally do not read the DaFont general discussion forum. Thread starters on DaFont have been known to exaggerate, for a variety of motives. I'm not saying I don't believe hanoded, but I am saying that I need to see physical evidence of his claim, before I'm convinced his allegations are true. He should have done that in the first post, as far as I'm concerned. He should do that now, or I would be inclined to disbelieve the allegation.

Without naming the font, naming the company that used the font without purchasing a license, and without showing visual evidence of the infringement, this thread is potentially an elaborate trolling endevour. We can accept hanoded at his word that a donation was not received, but we can't assume that a crime was committed, just because he says so.

If a guy went into a police station, and said that 'some guy' assaulted him, without providing evidence, the police could not arrest a random individual. hanoded ought to give us specific details, before any additional assistance is offered to him.

Edited on Feb 04, 2015 at 14:12 by metaphasebrothel

Feb 04, 2015 at 07:38  [reply]  Ligatures don't work

maxime77 said  
Ligatures don't work


I got this font, but the ligatures "fl" & "fi" don't work, even if they are integrated to the font.

You can try it with the preview there, it's the first font, by Bitstream :

When you type "fi" & "fl" in the preview, and you select to display the ligatures in the options, they don't work.


If you bought this font at myfonts, you should be using the help function at myfonts, instead of bringing this question up here.

If you got this font on a fly by night site offering free downloads of commercial fonts, it's probably not an original font, especially if the file you have is True Type. Those ligatures are open type features. If this is the case, you should not be discussing .pdf extract fonts here.

If you got it in the Phontdawg Collection, it might be an original, but you're wasting your time, if you try to get that now. All you're going to end up with is part of an archive that you'll never be able to complete, and you won't be able to open it, unless you have 100%.

That had been around for a while when I got it in 2008, and torrents on public sites never stay seeded for seven years, EVER. All you'll get is a part of the torrent, from some guy who thinks someone will complete the archive, but it will never happen. Anyyone seeding would be using a different torrent client than they did in 2008, and people who downloaded generally didn't reseed. It's probably five years since the Phontdawg Collection was circulating.

Feb 04, 2015 at 05:05  [reply]  Zapfino font for free?

daaams said  

Don't feed the trolls, sweeep. I'm not going to give you a green card, because that would allow you to legally work in the United States.

Feb 04, 2015 at 05:01  [reply]  Zapfino font for free?

Arend94 said  
Tua madre è Troia.

Don't be resurrecting threads to troll, pal. You've been warned.

Feb 04, 2015 at 04:50  [reply]  Illegal use of font

@ koeiekat and toto@k22: These are excellent points. As long as the information is factual, it is perfectly legal to shame a corporate entity publicly.

You missed one, in which there is a financial upside to the author: If hanoded is certain that his font was used by the company, (and whether or not they paid a licensing fee), hanoded has the right to advertise their use of his font. He could create a text or graphics notice that says "DK XXXXXXX font, as used by X Company, in this campaign". Any font author can do that, with any font they create, that's used by someone else.

A night club DJ in Tel Aviv, Israel, Liam Schachar, uses a glyph from my BeautyMarks font in his official logo:

In this case, the "fee" for commercial use was to provide me with an image of the font in use. He was willing to pay money to me for the use of the glyph, but I told him there was no monetary fee.

I don't need Liam's permission to associate my work with his corporate logo, because, effectively, we are promoting each other, benevolently. He could easily have purchased a commercial use license for a different font, containing a different glyph, but he chose to use a vector contained in a 100% free font. It would have been unethical to have charged Liam to use a free font, just because he had the means to pay. Liam does not, however, have any right to prevent another person from using the same glyph in a different logo, because the intellectual property belongs to me.

In the case of Dieter Steffmann, author of a large catalog of professional quality fonts, it appears to me that the only condition to use his fonts commercially is to ask politely for permission on his home page.

My previous post was very relevant. By making the font donationware, the author gives the user the option of choosing what they want to pay. There's a huge difference between holding an auction, with a reserve bid, and holding an auction without one.

Example: An original oil painting is sold at auction, with a reserve bid of $5,000. In order to potentially purchase the painting, a bidder needs to bid at least $5,001, and the highest bidder purchases the painting at the final bid value. If there were no reserve bid, and someone bid $1, and no one else bid, the painting would be sold for $1.

The buyer has no obligation to offer a fair price. If a kid has a comic book worth $100, and he takes it to a store, and an employee says "I'll give you $15 for it", and the kid agrees, the sale is legal. It's a bad decision by the kid to sell the comic book for less than market value, but the store employee has no obligation to offer market value in an offer to purchase.

My point is that the author creates the terms for commercial use, and donationware is a passive approach. Pablo Impallari made a fair amount of money from commercial licensing of Lobster, but 90% of his income came from ten percent of the purchasers. At least 80% of the purchasers paid $15 USD or less. A small few paid more than $500 USD. No one is going to donate $500 for one of hanoded's fonts, unless the quality improves, and the character maps are extended. If someone makes a font in a few hours, they shouldn't expect to make huge sums of money in licensing fees. People aren't going to pay much, if a similar font, professionally rendered, cost the same amount. If pastrami and bologna cost the same amount, no one would eat bologna.

Nobody should be making amateur and semi professional fonts with the goal of significant monetary gain. There are too many other fonts, with similar flaws. If you spend 500 hours making an excellent font, you're likely to earn significantly more in licensing than if you spent 500 hours making 100 fonts, spending five hours on each one. The one great one will be used commercially, and at a higher fee, more often than the 100 mediocre ones combined.

Donationware is the problem. It allows the user to set their own price, but not be legally bound to offer market value. If a minimum fee is applied, it ceases to be Donationware, it becomes shareware. A font needs to be professionally rendered before anyone is likely to donate anything significantly above the minimum amount requested. If you ask for too much, the purchaser will likely chose a different font, that's free, costs less, or has been more skillfully rendered..

Edited on Feb 04, 2015 at 04:56 by metaphasebrothel

methon, keep in mind that you have created a font that can be freely downloaded on the Internet. While you may have uploaded it exclusively to DaFont, and perhaps expressed an intent that the font not be redistributed by other sites, legally, that's only a request, but not a legal right, on your part. You don't want someone to do something, and you ask them not to, but they have no legal obligation to obey you.

Here's a good example: A sign on the side of a building states: "No smoking within five meters of this wall". Within five meters of the wall, there is a public sidewalk.

The directive on the sign is relevant to anyone who lives or works within the building, as they are obliged to obey instructions of their landlord or their employer, as a term of their tenancy or their employment contract. The directive is not binding, however, to a civilian walking on the sidewalk, (It is assumed that the hypothetical example does not take place in Singapore, Saudi Arabia, or another country where littering and/or public tobacco consumption are serious infractions).

If a punk rocker was smoking, while walking on the sidewalk in front of the building, but not loitering in one place, then if an official representative of the building told him he couldn't smoke there, the punk rocker could say, "Fuck off, asshole.", and continue on his way. Just because the building doesn't want people to smoke less than 5 meters from the wall, doesn't mean that other people need to comply, because the building doesn't own the sidewalk in front of it.

A prohibition of that sort can be enforced only on private property. It is possible for someone to be arrested merely for occupying public property, but only if they remain within one place, as if a beggar set up camp in front of the building, or if street prostitutes plied their trade in front of the building. If the building owned all the land within five meters of the wall, the directive would be legally enforceable on the average citizen.

In your case, when creating the font file, you have an obligation to include the terms of commercial use within the .ttf or .otf copyright and licensing fields. Including that information in a read me document, or a Note of the Author on DaFont, isn't enough. The commercial use fee relates to using the .ttf or .otf file. If someone uses the font commercially, without meeting the terms of commercial use, based on law, a Judge should rule in your favour, if the commercial use terms were included in the .ttf file, but the same Judge would rule against you, if they were not.

You could not sue fonts2U, because they have not used your font commercially. They've offered it as a free download. You could sue someone who used the font for commercial purposes, without abiding by the terms of the licensing. Where that person got the free font is irrelevant. Just because you write a note at DaFont, stating the terms of use, doesn't mean anyone is obliged to read it.

If the terms of commercial use are set out in the copyright and licensing internal fields, however, that sufficiently establishes your legal authority to set the terms of use, and requires someone using the font commercially to abide by your conditions.

You shouldn't worry about it. Hardly anybody goes to fonts2u for fonts, except by accident. There's nothing you can do about it. Welcome to the real world, where not everyone is your friend, nor are they bound by your whims.

Edited on Feb 04, 2015 at 09:29 by drf

Feb 03, 2015 at 20:00  [reply]  Illegal use of font

I personally feel that donationware is a bad commercial licensing option. It works, if the author makes fonts very quickly, and hopes to earn some income from the charity of the commercial use client. It presupposes that the customer will fairly compensate the author.

I'm going to use the example of the Lobster font, by Pablo Impallari. I know Pablo personally, and he's told me that some donations he receives are for $1, and some are for $1,000. Some of the people who contributed $1 could have contributed much more, but they didn't have to.

hanoded, in my opinion, you make too many fonts, and you don't spend enough time on each one. At best, they are 'semi-professional', and not worth paying more than a few dollars to use. You're not going to get anywhere, hiring a lawyer to litigate against someone in another country, in the hope of receiving a $10 settlement.

If you charge a fixed amount, then a customer will have to compare your fonts to other fonts in the same price range.

NEVER think of a Dafont download as being a 'potential sale'. A lot of people just like to collect free fonts. Many people have probably downloaded some of your fonts multiple times, because they couldn't remember if they already had downloaded yours, or not.

Probably 85% of your downloads are from 10% of your submissions. The average number of downloads for each of your fonts is about 62,000. I have eight freeware dingbats with much higher numbers.

You need to stop thinking about churning out a high volume of average to poor designs, with limited character maps. If you have a good design, spend extra time, trying to make it perfect, and worthy of purchase. When you have a bad design, don't even make it at all.

DK Lemon Yellow Sun is popular right now, but there are 1,000 fonts almost exactly the same, and with equally poor rendering. If a lot of people download, it just means they think your font is more valuable than the empty disk space it occupies, and the cost of the bandwidth to acquire it. It would be a good font, if you were twelve years old. You can, and have, made better fonts.

If you were playing Monopoly, what would you rather have?

a) One of each group, so you'd receive a token rent amount, when someone lands on a property you own, or

b) Hotels on Boardwalk and Park Place, and no other properties?

Typography, as a money making enterprise, is exactly like that, but each font is a property. You've got a couple of hundred cheap, undeveloped properties. All of them combined generate less income than you'd get from one player landing on Boardwalk and Park Place.

If you make fewer, but better, fonts, you'll do better than you will by relying on charity donations for work released too quickly.

Can I use "100% free" font to make any company's logo?

toto@k22 said  
...In my interpretation, Free and 100% Free are not the same...

toto@k22, LEEMINSUN did specify 100% Free, and put it in quotes. My answer is 100% true, with reference to his specific request.

If LEEMINSUN had just used the more vague term 'Free', your supplemental information would be relevant to this question, and to other questions similar to this one.

It is true that all fonts marked as 100% Free on DaFont have been so designated by the author, at the time of submission, or a subsequent change of license terms. For older fonts, submitted by someone other than the author, where a verified read me doc with license terms is either absent or non existent, the license terms field is left blank. "Free" status is never assumed, unless the author has designated the font as such. The exception is if there is no read me, but the terms of use are clearly stated in the header of the font file, Which Windows, in the infinite wisdom of Microsoft, now longer displays, when the font is opened in preview. If someone has a Vista, 7, or 8 operating system, and there is no read me document included in the .zip, someone might legitimately claim ignorance of the terms of commercial use, and place the liability on Microsoft, for removing the header information, when the font is viewed in preview.

Suppose that a font author uploaded to DaFont, with a read me/license document, and with commercial usage terms specified in the header. A representative of s fly-by-night font download site downloads from DaFont, and offers only the .ttf file, as a download on the fly by night site. Someone downloads from the fly-by-night, and, in the absense of visible evidence to the contrary, assumes that the font is free for all use, because no visible documentation states otherwise. It's very possible that a Judge might rulle in favour of the font author, with Microsoft as the respondent, because Microsoft decided to not display the header information in the preview, which had been plainly visible in Windows XP, and earlier, but not in later Windows operating systems. The burden of proof might fall on Microsoft, to justify the removal of this information, from the display in preview.

At one time, fonts in my Obey[b] dingbat series were listed as [b]free for personal use, but I never intended to receive any income, neither from licensing, nor donation. The read me documents stated that commercial use should be approved by Sheppard Fairey, because the series was based on his artwork. I later became more familiar with fair use International copyright law, and determined that, as long as I was not charging any fee for the commercial use, I could designate the fonts as 100% free. Since Fairey uses the same fair use provision in appropriating images for his street art posters, he would, effectively, convict himself of copyright violation, were he to restrict my right to fairly use his work, in another graphics medium.

I love ScanFont 3 from FontLab. It has nothing in common with FontLab's ScanFont 5.

ScanFont 3 is a stand alone Windows font editor from the mid 1990's that can create and open True Type and Post Script Type 1 fonts, but can't create or open Open Type, (.otf), files. ScanFont 5 is a plug-in for the FontLab Studio font editor.

Unfortunately, ScanFont 3 is no longer sold, and it doesn't work with any Windows operating system after XP, and some Windows automatic update in February, 2014 caused it to stop working for me with Windows XP, but I bought a second computer with XP, and only installed the updates to the end of January, 2014, and I keep that computer disconnected from the Internet, so the ScanFont 3 works fine on the 'dark' computer.

Geronimo, you're going to find that your font editor choices are limited, depending on which Operating System you use. I like XP and old school apps, but some newer apps won't work on my computer. More recent operating systems might restrict your ability to use older apps. Windows Vista is usually the first O/S for which older apps may not continue to function properly. The Ones that work with XP, generally worked previously with Windows '95, Windows '98, Windows Millennium Edition, and Windows 2000. Other apps tend to work with Vista, and Windows 7, 8, etc, so if you are offered a cheap older app, be warned that it might not be compatible with your Windows 8.

I disagree, toto@k22. A font with a 100% Free status was designated as such, by the author. If the license terms are clear, there's no need to ask if free means free. Many authors make their fonts 100% free, to avoid inquiries like this. Either it's free, or it's not. If It's free, except when someone wants it for commercial use, then it's free for personal use. Sometimes someone here will upload a 100% free font, and then change the terms, if the font is popular.

That could make for an interesting court debate: Author uploads the font on January 1, as 100% Free, and makes the font Free for personal use on February 1. Someone who downloaded the font between January 1-31 could argue that it is 100% free for them, but free for personal use, for anyone who downloaded February 1 or later. The file creation date from the download might be the crucial evidence. I don't think, in contracts, a fee for performance can be determined after the fact.

Example: A man meets a woman at a night club. She agrees to go home with him. In the morning, she says "By the way, I'm a prostitute. You owe me $1,000 for the overnight date". She wouldn't win the case, even with inept defense counsel. A judge would rule on the point of law. Something like that would never get to the trial stage.

Props, daaams. I hope that was a full ban, not just ten days.

Font on Kevin Schwantz 1994 suzuki motogp bike

Could anyone help me identify the font on KevinSchwantz's 1994 motogp Suzuki number plate? It's number 34 and you can find it easily on google images.
Thank you.
Oi, pessoal.
Alguém poderia me ajudar a identificar a fonte do número 34 na moto de corrida do Kevin Schwantz? Ele ganhou o campeonato de motogp em 1994 com esta moto e aquela fonte é espetacular e gostaria de usar na minha moto.

Smarten the fuck up.

" can find it easily on google images..."

You can easily find that image on google images, and post it for us.

If you want help, help yourself first, by doing your own fucking work, instead of telling us we can do it for you.

"If I'm asking for help, it's because I haven't been able to find it."

How can you say it can be found easily on google images, and in the next post, you say you haven't been able to find it? One of those statements isn't true, unless you are mentally retarded, meaning that we could find the image easily, but you couldn't find it, no matter how hard you try. If you are retarded, you should say so, and we'll help you find it. If you are not retarded, you certainly do give other people the impression that you might be. You should work on that. It will make it difficult for you to get a girlfriend. Don't think for a second that I give a rat's ass about hurting your feelings. If you want to be treated with respect, show it first. If you want to be treated like a piece of shit, just keep making the same kind of posts you've made so far in this thread. I enjoy treating people like pieces of shit, when they deserve it. Other people like to read what I say, when I do that, everybody exept the person I'm treating like a piece of shit, that is. Don't give me reason to do that to you again. I don't feed trolls. I squish them with the heel of my shoe. Remember that.

"People like you should be banned from social networks."

The Dafont forum is NOT Social media. We aren't here to serve you, like a waitress or a busboy in a restaurant. We help people who deserve to be helped. You don't appear to be one of them.

Don't piss me off again. Man the fuck up.

Don't apologize. Hang your head in shame. You've earned that, for being a Troll.


Edited 3 times. Last edit on Jan 22, 2015 at 13:02 by Rodolphe

All times are CEST. The time is now 02:57

Privacy Policy  -  Contact