Typophile - Ethics & Teaching Fontlab - Comments

Hannes, thanks for your

jevans4 — Thu, 17 Apr 2008 18:41:16 -0700

Hannes, thanks for your suggestion. I’ll check out FontConstructor. Thanks to those who thoughtfully responded.

In my experience the

Hannes Famira — Thu, 17 Apr 2008 13:13:42 -0700

In my experience the question your student raised usually comes up when the students feel insecure about their own ability to design type. When the task seems to daunting students seem to think that starting with a working set of characters will make their own design decisions easier. I have seen what happens next and strongly disagree. However, instead of even entering the discussion wether reverse engineering and plagiarizing other designers work is a creative, honorable and useful enterprise to boot I would suggest to react by making the whole undertaking more accessible. Prepare smaller bites for the students and guide them through the process. Have them draw one character, then the next. In the critique discuss how the letterforms interact. If guided through the alphabet this way, digitizing the drawings will be a relatively small step and nobody will even think to start with stolen outlines.

If learning FontLab and the principles of type design at the same time seems too complex for that particular class I recommend using FontConstructor (http://www.fontconstructor.com/) for their first project and then transitioning to Fontlab with the next assignment. This application is way easier to master, it’s free and encourages modular, object oriented design.

Discourage plagiarism by snubbing the very notion as below par for any designer. Shoplifting outlines is shameful and will be punished harshly.

Locks on doors and EULA are

concrete — Wed, 16 Apr 2008 16:16:35 -0700

Locks on doors and EULA are for honest people. Pulling a watch apart at home and finding out how it works and not telling anyone, then everyone is happy. Pulling it apart then copying it or using the technology for your own profit... then you can expect a letter in the mail.

For a design student to pull a font apart at home, take notes and just observe.. depends on how it is pulled apart, typing in Illustrator then converting to paths...? Or opening in a font design package to evaluate. Though to build onto an existing font without approval is wrong.

Though in this case if all of the ’Typography II class’ are creating their own ’an original?’, and the student in question is not, then that is cheating right?

Copyright and moral issues

Christian Robertson — Wed, 16 Apr 2008 16:02:44 -0700

Copyright and moral issues aside, the students should draw fresh outlines. Even if they started with someone else’s work (which is not uncommon in the industry), they should look at prints, and draw it from scratch. Otherwise they won’t be any closer to being type designers than when they started.

Thomas is a high school

Mark Simonson — Wed, 16 Apr 2008 14:43:11 -0700

Thomas is a high school student.

“Unfortunately, most

jayyy — Wed, 16 Apr 2008 14:24:23 -0700

“Unfortunately, most people here won’t agree with me about how copyright is obselete.”

Thomas - I do not know what your profession is or what your skillset is, but presuming it is somewhat creative, how can you say that copyright is obsolete?! Copyright is the little protection that intellectual property or creative work has to protect it from all out plagiarism.

There is only one chance to

dezcom — Wed, 16 Apr 2008 08:20:22 -0700

There is only one chance to approach something naively and discover the thinking process that is truly you and not someone else. The point is that you will truly learn more by making what you may deem “mistakes” than you will by doing it what others consider the “Right Way”. Don’t throw away this chance by picking apart someone else’s journey. There is no shortcut path so when you get “stuck” for a time, you will invent a unique path for yourself rather than go running back to see what that other guy did. If you do, you find a specific solution, not the path to all answers.

ChrisL

> There is no way better way

Don McCahill — Wed, 16 Apr 2008 07:10:18 -0700

> There is no way better way to truly understand the effectiveness of a typeface than to tear it apart into it’s root elements and rebuild it from your own perspective.

I will not dispute that there is some benefit to this practice. It is partially how I would teach typography (if I were skilled enough in the field to consider myself as teaching material). But the tearing apart and rebuilding should only be considered as a learning step, probably with a limited number of glyphs from any one font, and covering a wide range of fonts: a comparison of seven different ’a’ glyphs from different fonts in different categories, for instance.

When the students are skilled to the point of creating a first complete typeface, then they should be producing original creations, or if copying, then copying from an out of copyright printed document, the way a revival face might be created. Copying from a modern computer font is problematic in two ways: ethics, plus how do you know they created all the glyphs, and didn’t just steal some.

There are several theories

EK — Tue, 15 Apr 2008 15:11:40 -0700

There are several theories of contracts that explain why agreements must be honoured. Some are based on autonomy, some on efficiency, some on “ethics”. But consumer contracts are different in many respects. The state (without which there would be no copyright) can intervene where it sees fit and alter the terms of the contract. For example, your relationship with your bank is governed by regulations, your “agreement” notwithstanding. When you buy your gym membership, you might “agree” to waive certain liabilities, yet the law does not give effect to your “consent”. Similarly, it is wrong to assume that a student who acquires a font, or borrows materials from a library, or purchases a CD at the store, has only those rights stipulated in some “license”. Sometimes the license is effective, sometimes it isn’t.

Hey, I agreed with Nick on

Thomas Phinney — Tue, 15 Apr 2008 15:06:01 -0700

Hey, I agreed with Nick on something! :)

I’m not a lawyer, and anyone looking to violate a contract they’ve agreed to (such as their font license terms) on the grounds that they think it’s illegal should definitely consult a lawyer first.

Basic info on the subject is here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illegal_agreement

Other reasons a contract may not stand up:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contract#Setting_aside_the_contract

Note that the relevant law presumably differs from one country to another....

As I understand it (and

Nick Shinn — Tue, 15 Apr 2008 13:50:27 -0700

As I understand it (and I’m not a lawyer) the person who writes a contract can put any conditions they want into it, no matter how seemingly absurd, and if someone else agrees to the contract (in order to acquire access to the property), then they are bound by the terms.

If they think the terms are unreasonable, then they shouldn’t agree to the contract—in which case they won’t get the property and won’t be able to study it.

If the terms are illegal, in the sense that the licensor claims rights which they don’t possess, that’s another matter.

But in that case, wouldn’t you consider it unethical of the licensee to agree to the contract in order to gain access to the property, knowing that he/she was going to ignore the terms of the contract?

Yes, if it contravenes the

EK — Tue, 15 Apr 2008 12:03:45 -0700

Yes, if it contravenes the terms by which the study material is made available to students.

You cannot contravene illegal terms.

Would you consider a

Nick Shinn — Tue, 15 Apr 2008 11:37:51 -0700

Would you consider a prohibition on study ethical?

Yes, if it contravenes the terms by which the study material is made available to students.

2) Opening and studying

EK — Tue, 15 Apr 2008 10:30:50 -0700

2) Opening and *studying* existing well-made fonts is a useful learning exercise (assuming it’s permitted by the font license).

Fortunately, if copyright law gives you the right, the restriction in the font license is probably unenforceable.

This thread began with ethics. Would you consider a prohibition on study ethical (keeping in mind “the Progress of Science and useful Arts”)? If your answer is yes, is it applicable to all intellectual property, or just to fonts?

Instead of relying on the

Charles Leonard — Tue, 15 Apr 2008 07:46:09 -0700

Instead of relying on the fonts of others I have students appropriate working methods and begin by drawing fundamental characters (HOV hov) while using established fonts as a means of controlling basic proportional relationships. Seeing these relationships among characters and understanding how to apply them to their own work is an essential component of education in graphic design. But they cannot modify another’s work whether that other is a professional designer or another student. Appropriating another’s working method is fine but appropriation of another’s work is grounds for dismissal.

Ethics & Teaching Fontlab

jevans4 — Sun, 13 Apr 2008 11:04:45 -0700

Hello all, first-time poster, though I’ve been a subscriber for awhile. I am teaching my Typography II class FontLab basics in order to create their own typeface. A student asked if they could start from an existing typeface and make changes to create their own font. I didn’t have an answer to this ethical dilemma so I’m turning to you for help. What do you say, Typophiles?

Many thanks for your feedback!