Right from the beginning, I was convinced that Avenir is the better Futura. Adrian Frutiger Does Linotype pay royalties to Paul Renner?
Can somebody send me Bill’s post of Tuesday, June 22, 2004 — 10:44 am please? I heard it had sex in it. And what the hell happened to letimes.com? Bill, if there was one way you could make yourself useful to the type world, that was it, but you’re just sitting on the idea. hhp
Bill Troop writes: With all this dreadful litigation going on, we still don’t have a usable digital version of Bembo. What do you think of Aetna?
I don’t know if Bill is still here — maybe it was a hit & run — a felony not just in US traﬃc law but netiquette too — but I actually hope he’s still around. Bill likes Aetna a lot. When I wrote my review of Vendetta back when, he arranged for me to get a copy of it to review as well — but for various reasons that never materialized. I owe Jack one. hhp
Dear Mr. Hunt, As a graphic designer, I appreciate the Berthold type library, particularly Akzidenz Grotesk, which may come at no surprise as I’m sure its very popular. In fact, I’d be inclined to say that if stranded on a desert island with one font and a newletter to publish, AG would be a top choice. However, when our studio is looking to purchase new fonts, I’m less inclined to purchase from Berthold when I have heard so many rumblings of lawsuits and cease-and-desist letters to other, arguably smaller, type foundries over similar-sounding font naming taxonomies. When I attended TypeCon last year, I was heartened to get my ﬁrst taste of the cameraderie of the type design industry, not to mention observing over the last few years the friendliness of font industry designers and reps in their interactions here at Typophile, many of which are small business owners working very hard to stay aﬂoat and perfect their craft in a tough industry. Many foundries and retailers were represented at TypeCon; I don’t recall any Berthold presence, other than careful mentions in hushed conversations. Come to think of it, I rarely hear of anything other than legal action and scare tactics. Surely you must understand that while these actions intend to protect your assets from infringement, the perceptions of the end customer suﬀer. How would you respond to this? As one of the established names/brands in the industry, what is Berthold doing to preserve the craft and build the community? Sincerely, B. Gibbs
Moderator’s Note: For those who are following along and might be curious, this thread is presumably in response to this one and/or possibly this one.
To answer to Mr Hunt, I just say that his story seems partial and omit some examples for which he can’t be proud. An example: http://www.bertholdtypes.com/bq_library/90051.html Boton family is sold by Berthold Types despite Albert Boton never sign any contract with this new company. Note that Albert Boton never see any
>Can you tell me if cease-and-desist letters are >common in our industry? Of course they are.
>Being inconspicuous is much more eﬀective. :-/ And that will sell a lot of fonts.
The Russian foundry FontCity run by Igor Shipovsky reports that BTL forced them to rename their fonts CITY OF SAMARA, CITY OF PLESETSK, CITY OF KHABAROVSK, CITY OF TSARITSYN, CITY OF SUZDAL, CITY OF CHERKIZOVO, CITY OF OSTANKINO, CITY OF MOSKVA because it apparently infringed BTL’s registration of the trademark “CITY” for typefaces. Here’s the correspondence: http://www.fontcity.ru/berthold.htm http://www.fontcity.ru/answer.htm http://www.fontcity.ru/attorney.htm The main text is in Russian only: http://www.fontcity.ru/rv.htm Apparently, Igor Shipovsky decided to give way to BTL and renamed all his “City of ***” fonts to “Gorod.***”, as you can see on: http://www.myfonts.com/browse/foundry/fontcity/ Mike Rifkin, Canada
>I was talking about public discussion. And >your anonymity helps prove my point. Being inconspicuous in public discussion is more eﬀective than sending cease and desist letters?
>letting (in this case) corporations be successful >with their scare-tactics If you put out a font called Fuityger you’d probably get a cease and desist letter from Linotype, if you put out one called Ffunit or just Unite you’d probably get one from FontShop. Complaining about foundries trying to protect their trademarks is a pointless excercise. Please complain to the Typophile admins that Linotype is a sponsor, but that Linotype have sent out cease and desist letters in the past and taken court action against those who have pritaed their fonts or their designs.
>No, it’s more eﬀective than being legal in avoiding >cease and desist letters. I think what you mean is that if people don’t want to get cease and desist letters for infringement of trademarks then they shouldn’t make it obvious that they are distributing them? Isn’t that pretty much *not* distributing them? It’s easier just to pick another name isn’t it?
>like CITY OF CHERKIZOVO. Is the question “does like CITY OF CHERKIZOVO infringe on the trademark Berthold City?”? Berthold thinks it does, and asked that it be changed. The guy that put it out probably thinks it doesn’t, but doesn’t need the hassle… which tends towards him agreeing with Berthold. The fact is that no one really knows, because only a court is competent to decide — and it didn’t go to court.
True John. Too true. Let’s not mistake an argument with Hrant for an argument on the merits of the points in this thread. And let’s not mistake using the law (where there are real merits and valuable protections) for abusing the law where the goal is simply to eliminate the competition rather than legitimately protect something like a trade name.
>Let’s not mistake an argument with Hrant for an >argument on the merits of the points in this thread. What are the points of this thread? Or their merits? Mr Berthold wants to put his case. Who can argue the merits of that? People want to ask “but how many cease and desist letters did you write?” Ok, what’s the merit in that question, when every foundry does the same thing? If you want to argue about the points Herr Spiekermann made, then go ahead, but that’s a diﬀerent thread — where Herr Spiekermann says hisself, Berthold are entitled to protect their rights. >And let’s not mistake using the law… As pointed out previously, it’s not really up to us to make those decisions. If you want to debate whether Berthold are the bad guys, then I think you can do that, but don’t do it on the basis of them trying to protect their trade marks.
Allow me to interject before we steer oﬀ course. Let’s stay on topic and save the back-and-forth for private messages. There’s an opportunity here for some meaningful discussion. I, for one, am hoping we’ll see a response from Berthold now that their post has spawned such conversation.
BertHoldings FIRE SALE! You too can now own the hard work of unpaid type designers! Choose from this selection of royalty-free loot from BertHoldings: http://bertholdtypes.com/bq_library/90001.html http://bertholdtypes.com/bq_library/90002.html http://bertholdtypes.com/bq_library/90009.html http://bertholdtypes.com/bq_library/90010.html http://bertholdtypes.com/bq_library/90012.html http://bertholdtypes.com/bq_library/90013.html http://bertholdtypes.com/bq_library/90014.html http://bertholdtypes.com/bq_library/90017.html http://bertholdtypes.com/bq_library/90018.html http://bertholdtypes.com/bq_library/90019.html http://bertholdtypes.com/bq_library/90029.html http://bertholdtypes.com/bq_library/90047.html (Bellevue) http://bertholdtypes.com/bq_library/90054.html http://bertholdtypes.com/bq_library/90057.html http://bertholdtypes.com/bq_library/90059.html http://bertholdtypes.com/bq_library/90060.html http://bertholdtypes.com/bq_library/90065.html http://bertholdtypes.com/bq_library/90066.html http://bertholdtypes.com/bq_library/90068.html http://bertholdtypes.com/bq_library/90069.html http://bertholdtypes.com/bq_library/90080.html http://bertholdtypes.com/bq_library/90082.html http://bertholdtypes.com/bq_library/90083.html http://bertholdtypes.com/bq_library/90089.html http://bertholdtypes.com/bq_library/90090.html http://bertholdtypes.com/bq_library/90091.html http://bertholdtypes.com/bq_library/90094.html http://bertholdtypes.com/bq_library/90099.html http://bertholdtypes.com/bq_library/90102.html http://bertholdtypes.com/bq_library/90103.html http://bertholdtypes.com/bq_library/90104.html http://bertholdtypes.com/bq_library/90105.html http://bertholdtypes.com/bq_library/90106.html http://bertholdtypes.com/bq_library/90111.html http://bertholdtypes.com/bq_library/90112.html http://bertholdtypes.com/bq_library/90113.html http://bertholdtypes.com/bq_library/90116.html http://bertholdtypes.com/bq_library/90117.html http://bertholdtypes.com/bq_library/90119.html http://bertholdtypes.com/bq_library/90120.html http://bertholdtypes.com/bq_library/90121.html http://bertholdtypes.com/bq_library/90122.html http://bertholdtypes.com/bq_library/90123.html http://bertholdtypes.com/bq_library/90124.html http://bertholdtypes.com/bq_library/90126.html http://bertholdtypes.com/bq_library/90128.html http://bertholdtypes.com/bq_library/90137.html http://bertholdtypes.com/bq_library/090172000.html http://bertholdtypes.com/bq_library/90205.html Marvelous! That’s around half the library! And not a single cent of your purchase goes to any of the designers! Ecommerce servers are standing by!
By the way, Is not Mr. Harvey Hunt the person who used to run this FontShop outlet famous for selling font *without sending the money to the designers*?
Erik Spiekermann wrote: “Berthold Types has no contracts with any of the original designers whose fonts are being sold today” Berthold listed several of the original designers so how can Erik Spiekermann “substantiate everything i wrote” when he lied about this. There is no libel in the truth but there is in false statements. Perhaps that is why Erik Spiekermann will not respond in this forum.
Petra As Erik stated even a letter from an attorney can be threatening in itself why don’t you lead by example and post the letter that you sent online so that others can learn how do achieve things without threats (real or implied).
>Berthold listed several of the original designers so how >can Erik Spiekermann “substantiate everything i wrote” >when he lied about this. I think it’s not really the case that Mr Spiekermann lied, there are diﬀerent interpretations on what was written, here’s one. Spiekermann: >3. Berthold Types has no contracts with any of the >original designers whose fonts are being sold today; >thus eﬀectively stealing from designers… While Hunt says: >Contrary to Mr. Spiekermann’s statement, Berthold Types >has agreements with Guenter Gerhard Lange, Bernd >Moellenstaedt, Dieter Hofrichter, Orjan Nordling and >Prof. Werner Schneider. Well straight away it should be clear that these ﬁve individuals are not those representing all the designs in the Berthold catalogue. Additionally it seems that Hunt is talking about “new” or reworked designs, where Spiekermann is talking about the “original” designs. I think it’s unlikely that Spiekermann is privvy to the day to day running of Berthold, so it’s equally unlikely that he knows exactly who is doing what for them — so missing some detail here cannot be contsrued as lying (you can only lie if you falsely state something that you actually know). The worst that you can say is that Spiekermann exaggerated — but even then he would need to know every fact, and it’s not clear that anyone outside Bethold does, or even that Berthold itself does (being the “ﬁnal” recipient in a long line of bankruptcies). As posted by “Hans Mustermann” there’s a great chunk of the Berthold library for which no designer receives a royalty.
Moderator comments: The opinions expressed in this forum do not necessarily represent the opinions of Typophile, their aﬃliates, organizers, advertisers and/or sponsors.
Chris, all are worthwhile questions, but probably deserve their own, new thread.
“Finally, Berthold oﬀered and still oﬀers a contract to anybody who had original designer agreements with H. Berthold AG.” But when you receive no answer from an existing designer (years ago now), you should stop to distribute the family rather than to continue to distribute it and making money without paying the designer. More, all money received from Adobe sales of the typeface (This family of typefaces part of ATM bundle… just imagine the amout…) should be given at the correct percentage to the original designer. Its fair practise that you seems ignoring completly.
I just have a call with the real Albert, and its worst than what I recall. He never receive any letter, proposal from you. So, you have registred the own name of Boton http://tess2.uspto.gov/bin/showﬁeld?f=doc&state=4j4nlg.2.2 and distribute his typeface family. He never received any money from it. Please explain.
>…boycott… Please! Get real. Berthold says it spends millions of dollars promoting and protecting its fonts — do you really think that a few bad words on the internet are going to make any diﬀerence then think again. All this is “tomorrow’s ﬁsh and chip wrappers”. Do you think McDonalds sells less burgers because they got Plazm to pull a character from a font?
>If it’s not spin-control… It is spin control, but so what? Who knows any more now than they did a couple of weeks ago? If someone wants to use a Berthold font what are they going to do, steal it? Worse, if someone
I agree with John on this, but I’ll point out the obvious diﬀerences: >There were enough empty seats on the busses in Selma… Ok, how did that change? Lot’s of people walked around outside the bus station with placards screaming “boycott the bus” and lots of people cared enough about the issue to do something about it. You had a grass-roots movement. Now if ten of you march up and down outside Berthold
>(I think that this is all true) I think all of this is bullshit. Bitstream has never had any licence from Linotype for their designs, except within the last six months they have signed an agreement to pay royalties to Linotype, and have a license to use the trademarks. All those fonts right through the 80s and 90s were sold without licensing the trademarks or designs, and no designer got paid. Perhaps this was “legal”, but what are you all railing against Berthold for, doing something illegal — call a cop! No, you’re accusing them of being legalistic and perhaps immoral — I haven’t seen anyone claim they broke any laws. I don’t mean to support them, I understand that some people came oﬀ a lot worse oﬀ because of Berthold’s practices. But a lot more people lost out due to Bitstream’s practices, and those of other foundries (Agfa still selling Triumvirate, and licencing stuﬀ like Book Antiqa and Segoe to Microsoft).
>Bitstream isn’t in Berthold league, not by a long shot. >Not to those of us who care about decency. I agree, Berthold is a long way short of the diablocal actions of Bitstream. Berthold, allegedly, stole perhaps a couple of dozen designs — Bitstream stole thousands. If it’s not the point, then why is Dan Reynolds trying to defend Bitstream on the basis of what they did was legal!? Does he also not know what the point is?
>And this isn’t about companies stealing fonts from each other… It isn’t? I thought the whole point of the thread was the accusations made that Berthold didn
>it is about bullying Who
>And I would like to know the answer to my two questions. Then write a letter to Berthold in Illinois. >And if they go unanswered, I’d like to know what >people think the reason(s) for that might be. Because they are no longer paying attention. Because it
>1) That Berthold is not necessarily at fault here in any way… I never wrote that. What I wrote was that if you want to criticise them do so for stealing the designs of others — don’t do so for sending out cease and desist letters. And if you’re going to do it then take into account what others do — ie Bitstream and Agfa… If you go back to the comments that started this thread you’ll see that even Erik Spiekermann — who has more to complain about than most others here — said that Berthold are entitled to protect their trademarks. >2) That the real intention of your posts are to bring >closure and/or abandonment to an issue that you do not >want to see discussed further (especially by Hrant). Not at all, I just see no logic in demanding answers when it is reasonably clear that you won’t get them. Additionally it’s still not altogether clear to me *what* this thread is about. It starts with Hunt responding to Spiekermann’s allegations — someone (smart person) calls Spiekermann a liar (good move I think!). Some points are clariﬁed, many are not. Read between the lines and you have the answers: Berthold pays some of its “designers” — these are people who are engaged in revivals of their own work or extensions of the same. Berthold has no choice but to pay them because they wouldn’t do the “new” work otherwise. Therefore it is obvious that those that are not named are not getting paid — because the “spin control” would seek to neutralise all the criticism that it can. It can’t, QED. >Bouncer, I ﬁnd it strange that you are so quick to forgive >Berthold, yet you will demonize Bitsttream I never forgave Berthold, nowhere in this thread. And what Bitstream did in terms of design theft was much worse than Berthold. It’s easy. >Even if they are guilty of piracy in the past, which >I don’t believe, they are certainly clean now. What do you mean you don’t believe!? Bitstream stole all of Linotype’s designs, renamed them and sold them for years and years — there was no deal with Linotype that allowed them to do this. Please, show us some evidence to back up your claim? The reason all the names were changed was because otherwise it would infringe the trademark, the only protection available to Linotype in the USA. IE Bitstream relied on the law rather than ethics. I believe you are confusing this issue with that of URW — which is similar, but quite diﬀerent. >At least I have the decency to post under my real name >when I make controversial statements such as the ones above. Great, you can use your “real name” to perpetuate lies, and I can’t use a nick to tell the truth. Justice! >Those storeis would show up here, too, and they haven’t. Yes, because this is the font of all knowledge.
>If they honoured the old contracts, one might be more >inclined to believe that argument. That’s a very good point Erik, thank you.
I am new to this forum and must say I ﬁnd that I don’t think these photos are a good idea. How can I think about discussion when I have Hrant staring like a Biblical prophet waiting for his dinner? The discussion here — so bitter and humourless. Why can’t we have some discussion of the most funny lawsuit in type history? I’m sure some of you know about it. It’s the one between two major type entities over Hrant himself. What makes it funny is that everybody agreed not to tell Hrant anything about it. Hasn’t enough time passed to let this cat out of the bag?
Moderator’s Note: Please enjoy the new lo-carb version of this thread. We’ve cut the fat and sugar, and left the meat. However if you enjoy your Typophile with bickering, name-calling and oﬀ-topic (ahem) ranting, refer to this uneditted PDF.
Trademark law also does not require that the infringer use the EXACT trademark. The US requires only that the mark be “confusingly similar” and looks at the facts and circumstances of the situation. Other jurisdictions (e.g. England) also do not require use of the EXACT trademark to ﬁnd infringement.
Trademark law also does not require that the infringer use the EXACT trademark. The US requires only that the mark be “confusingly similar” and looks at the facts and circumstances of the situation. Other jurisdictions (e.g. England) also do not require use of the EXACT trademark to ﬁnd infringement.
I’m curious. Is this because those who wrote the law and “lawyers” in general don’t see and haven’t been educated to the diﬀerences? It assumes a lot to say that “typophiles” are probably alone in seeing the minute diﬀerences. Granted it also assumes a lot that they aren’t alone. But isn’t that where the law falls apart and fails us? They write a law but don’t bother to see the possible diﬀerences? “What ARE typefaces … who cares … it is all Times, Arial and Verdana.” It seems to me that this law needs some brushing oﬀ and cleaning up if something as simple as a few letters or a vague descriptor is giving people the right to go to court. What a waste of energy. I suppose I do understand wanting to protect what you worked to create. But with something like type … word gets around … most anyone who is going to license type and understands the investment they are making will shop around and ask around … typophile is proof of that, we get questions all the time. Why would we suggest Signata if what they really want is Signa? The name, at the end of the day, is irrelevant to the person who will license the type. It is actually the design that counts the most. I have had clients ask me the diﬀerence between Times Roman and Times New Roman, I know that it is only typophiles that are interested. ––––– On another similar note. I’m curious about contracts for use of their designs. In the world of design, and as I understand it, once a contract expires or if no contract is signed, the ownership of the artwork reverts (or is always) with the designer. Isn’t this the same with typeface design? I’m referring to the GAG Handbook of Pricing and Ethical Guidlines … According to the Fair Practices Act sections 359.350 (Deﬁnitions for ORS 359.350 to 359.365), 359.355 (Art work reproduction rights retained by artist unless expressly transferred; eﬀect of federal copyright laws), 359.360 (Ownership of physical work of art remains with artist unless expressly transferred), 359.365 (Ambiguity in agreement transferring right to reproduce art work resolved in favor of artist) What I’m driving at, in my own inarticulate manner, is while a typeface name and design may be trademarked … or is the design only copyrighted … by a given foundry, shouldn’t the design itself revert back to the originator of the design? ––––– If you can trademark a word, but names are too ambiguous you must add a word that somehow makes it unequivocal, what is the diﬀerence from this to just adding a few letters? If we look at the following examples, and I’ve stuck to the two foundries which have been discussed, maybe someone can explain these to me. ITC Esprit, 1985 (which FontShop carries) Sayer Esprit, ? Signata, 1994 Signal FF Signa All diﬀerent. Is it okay then for a foundry to work against itself? I’m sincere in my questions, for once I’m not trying to be cheeky.
I’ll add that I’m in no way questioning the right to protect a typeface design.
A quick side note for Mr. Hunt: As far as I know, the various FontShops are actually independently owned/run businesses, so I don’t think that what any individual FontShop is selling has anything to do with Spiekermann & Co. From their “About FSI” page: FSI (FontShop International), founded in 1990, is a renowned type foundry based in Berlin, Germany, with an oﬃce in San Francisco, USA. FontShops FSI are Licensors of the FontShop concept. There are 6 independent FontShops in Europe, Australia, and USA. That said, I’d love to hear you argue that the use of the word “city” in the name of a typeface is going to lead to consumer confusion. That’s almost akin to trying to trademark “Greek” or “Type” or “Hand”! Perhaps you should simply make a crappy typeface (not that the original Berthold typefaces are crappy) for every potential generic font name soon-to-be in existence and put all future competitors out of business! Or perhaps someone in the Typophile community should register the name “Berthold” for numerous types of products beyond the reach of your current trademarks, if for no other reason than to try to create some REAL customer confusion and give you a taste of your own medicine! I guess I’m just wondering why you’re in this business at all — there are so many other way to make much more signiﬁcant amounts of money if you’re willing to be as ruthless as you’ve demonstrated. Are you actually a typography enthusiastic to any degree?!?
In this corner we have ITC Orbon versus Bitstream Orbit! Linotype’s got Univers. They could sue ITC over University Roman, but then ITC might just turn around and crack down on URW for Roman Stylus. Then URW could go after ITC for using Stylus, and then ITC could sue Bitstream for Bruce Old Style, just to keep them on their toes. Wait, I left out Humana. That’s it. Bitstream, you sue ITC back for that Bruce Old Style thing by holding up Humana in court against your mighty Humanist! Nice one. Now there’s Elsner + Flake. They’ve got a lot of nerve using Rose Garden and Rose Deco when it’s clear that Agfa Monotype has Rosewood. And how can Agfa get away with Davison Americana when Bitstream has had American Typewriter for ever. Good thing that old Omicron Delta was put in its place to protect Jaeger Delta. And good thing Berthold cracked down on Signa in order to protect Signata. Or was it the other way round? Linotype, did you know you can sue Agfa? Yeah, your Shelley and Shelley Script could easily take Agfa’s puny Shelley Adante Script. What are you waiting for? Millions of your customers are confused! Berthold has City. Good one. It’s hard to believe there are foundries out there with the nerve to sell Beijing, New York, Orlando, Monaco, Chicago, Atlanta, London and even Old London. There’s Paris from one foundry and Old Paris Nouveau from another. There’s Parisian and then there’s Parisian and don’t forget Old Art Nouveau in case you want to cover all the old and nouveau bases. Which is which?! Sue everybody! Dax vs. Dex vs. Dex Gothic Estiennium vs. Etienne Fago Oﬃce vs. Oﬃcina vs. Info Oﬃce vs. Info Jannon vs. Janson (I bet he’s rolling in his grave. Or probably just rolling his eyes.) Meta vs. Metallophile Yanus vs. Janus Ooh, I’ve got a good one. Picture this: Times vs. the whole times cartel, Times New Roman, News Gothic, News Plantin, Plantin and Plantain. (Which one is the plaintif?) Stone vs. Stone Hinge vs. Manga Stone vs. Stone Age vs. Stone Print. And in the second round watch as Stone takes on Bedrock et al. Fuse vs. Fusion Recently my wife asked me to pick up some Corn Flakes and then got upset when I came home with Frosted Flakes. Of course nearly all of these are ﬁctitious, in case anybody is confused. I know it can be hard to tell the asinine examples from the asinine examples.
So now that I’ve gotten the satire out… What many lawyers and apparently the USPTO don’t get is the reason the fonts in the above post do not get confused is because the fonts look completely diﬀerent. We’re not talking about knock-oﬀ Kate Spade handbags or fake Swiss Army watches. Mr. Hunt, with all due respect, and with the humor aside. I hope you’ll see that people hold Berthold products in high esteem, otherwise they would’ve stopped paying attention a long time ago. If the Berthold fonts sucked we would’ve changed the channel. Now is your chance to show that Berthold is worth preserving for the craftsmanship of it, not petty font names. Regardless of the technicalities of the law, regardless of your ability to present a case in court and win, I hope you realize that the nature of your lawsuits seem frivolous to those familiar with the profusion of similar font names. That’s the business you bought in to. I think it’s safe to assume that you started this thread in order to clear the Berthold name. I realize nobody is on trial in this thread. There’s no judge or jury here. But what is at stake is the collective perception of the Berhold name. If it’s true that a brand is nothing more than a collection of perceptions in your customers’ minds… And obviously you value the Berthold name or you wouldn’t desire to protect it by setting some facts straight… If these are true I hope you can see that the way to gain positive inﬂuence can’t be gained in a court — and certainly not with the heavy handedness you seem to have shown over what appears to be triﬂing issues. In court you have had some wins, but in the public mind you look like the playground bully. The branding lesson here is that whether you are a bully or not is irrelevant. What is relevant is what your customers think, and to a large degree what you do next, because, whether you like the attention or not, people are paying attention. Given the respect people have for Berthold products I think it’s safe to assume they don’t want to see Berthold fail. Let Berthold succeed by being innovative or intelligent or creative or hard working or quick to market or… pick an attribute people can believe in. I didn’t really intend to write an op-ed piece. I’m not privvy to whatever litigation has happened. Frankly I don’t really care who said what — and that’s kind of my point. When it comes to your branding issue — where brand equals reputation — those details matter less than the perceptions you create by seeming to wield an iron ﬁst or by seeming to letting your counsel speak for you. Or by sending letters over light-weight issues. I hope you’ll take this in the spirit it’s intended: with respect for the heritage you entrust, the designers you employ and with hopes for a better future for Berthold.
Thank you for telling us your side of the story. Two questions, if I may: 1) You cited 5 designers with whom you have a valid business relationship. How many designers total are represented in your library? How would you describe the relationship with them? 2) “Berthold Types has ﬁled only twelve lawsuits”. May we please know how many “cease and desist” and other what might be informally called “pre-lawsuit” letters you have sent out? I think this is signiﬁcant because -as anybody knows- a confrontational letter (especially when directed to individuals with modest or non-existent legal resources) can have nearly the same eﬀect as a lawsuit. I ask these question only in the interest of full disclusure (some of us simply enjoy knowing), not as a potential basis for persecution. I don’t have a lawyer, btw. But I am from Beirut. hhp