This has been bugging me for a while, so I thought to seek counsel and wisdom from the Typophile Circle of Wise People...
If the sanskritweb.net section on font forgeries is somewhere near to being accurate (rather than just shark baiting), then the following questions seem relevant to ask:
1. Take Bitstream fonts as an example. It seems that a large percentage of Bitstream fonts are forgeries of Linotype fonts. See this for a comparison of Bitstream-to-Linotype font names: http://www.sanskritweb.net/forgers/bitstream2.pdf . How is this legally possible? And why does it persist? One of the universal messages that comes through loud and clear in sites such as Typophile is that designers (font & creative) are pretty proud and protective of their work. How would Nick S. or Mark S. feel if someone systematically forged their libraries? Not only does the forgery-thing seem to be widely tolerated, the industry treats people like M. Carter as celebrities. Why?
2. In various design-related forums, including Typophile, Bitstream typefaces are highly regarded. In fact, often they are preferred over conventional Linotype/Monotype offerings... say, Univers versus Zurich, or several of the historical types. Is it truly because Bitstream fonts are exceptionally well designed, or that some social-psychological reaction is occurring which triggers a David vs. Goliath image within us? And now that Goliath (Monotype) has acquired the twin Davids of Bitstream and Linotype, what is to eventually happen to what forgeries?