[Lohit-devel-list] Planning to drop Reserved Font Name (RFN) from OFL.txt

Richard Fontana rfontana at redhat.com
Fri Dec 28 00:07:03 UTC 2012


On Thu, Dec 27, 2012 at 03:25:41PM +0000, Dave Crossland wrote:
> On 27 December 2012 15:23, Richard Fontana <rfontana at redhat.com> wrote:
> > On Thu, Dec 27, 2012 at 11:04:12AM +0000, Dave Crossland wrote:
> >> On 27 December 2012 08:57, Pravin Satpute <psatpute at redhat.com> wrote:
> >> > 2. Added Trademark line in COPYRIGHT file
> >>
> >> I am very confused - this contradicts the idea of dropping of the RFN.
> >
> > That statement itself seems to contradict something you said on this
> > list on 6 December 2012 regarding Overpass:
> >
> >   If 'Overpass' is considered a valuable Red Hat trademark, I'd
> >   personally suggest declaring trademark notices alongside copyright
> >   notices for both licenses.
> >
> > (unless I misunderstood it).
> >
> > In any case, I don't see a contradiction. The RFN is used to add a
> > trademark-like copyright condition to the OFL. The trademark notice is
> > just a trademark notice.
> 
> Right - but Pravin said,
> 
> >> > we have decided to drop RFN from Lohit fonts.
> 
> which suggest removing trademark notices also.

Ah, I see - I think I did misunderstand your earlier comment. I now
understand you to have been saying "if the name is so important, why
not include *both* the RFN and a conventional trademark notice". I
instead had thought you meant "why bother to use the RFN mechanism -
if the name is so important you can just include a trademark notice".

In any case, I don't see the harm in the project maintainer including
the trademark notice. 

- RF




More information about the Lohit-devel-list mailing list