I said I would not comment on this issue any further. I did not say I would not comment on your studied silence to this answer.

But have you noticed how telling and significant this silence is? It has more meaning than a thousand words. So thank you for all the information.

Prof. Dr. Rodrigo de S

Maybe people don't want to be subpoena-ed? :-)
Dunno. To me it's just a boring topic.

But for the record, you should definitely follow your conscience more than the Law, I agree 100%.

hhp

Rodrigo,

you write: "Since Mr. Adam Twardoch and Mr. Dan Reynolds are working for Linotype and since Mr. Thomas Phinney is employed by Adobe, it is understandable, that they do not want that fonts of these companies are examined by criminal courts. "

I have never read anything more absurd. I think you have twisted what I and other have written beyond any tolerance.

I don't really care whether some fonts are investigated by some lawyers. However, I find it scandalous that a private person posts requests for illegal copies of a computer font, and explains that he doesn't care for law, and all this, as he claims, to help in some LEGAL CASE.

If any state authority of any country needs to obtain archival copyrighted data, that authority should make a proper official contact with the companies involved. The prosecutors should contact both Berthold Types Limited and Linotype Library, requesting for an archival copy of the files in question, rather than asking a friend who would ask a friend who would ask some people on Typophile for a pirated copy.

You can follow whatever you want, but I hope at least the prosecutors you mention will follow the law. Or at least the common sense.

I wish these prosecutors had better advisors when it comes to fonts. Otherwise, who knows what will come out of these "examinations".

Regards,
Adam Twardoch
not speaking on behalf
of anybody except himself

Adam:

As I said, I won't take this matter up again. But even if I understand that you may feel hurt by my answer (which was not my intention) please do not distort what I said.

I never tried to illegally get Akzidenz-Grotesk in order to help in a legal case. I tried to get what I though was a discontinued and therefore legally possible to give, or lown, fount.

I took very long to answer *after* I knew what was at stake. I finally decided to reply because very offending intentions were attributed to me, and I can't allow that.

And yes, I will follow my conscience and not the law if law does not coincide with ethics.

If you want to discuss ethics, I will reply.

Regards,

Rodrigo de S

Rodrigo,

I didn't feel hurt by any of your remarks. Please don't try to imply that there is something personal in my reaction -- there isn't. It doesn't matter that I ever worked for Linotype, or whatever. I never worked for Berthold or Monotype or Font Bureau or Hoefler etc., but I still wouldn't watch happily if someone calls for making illegal copies of their fonts, even those that are retired or renamed now.

I still cannot understand how making illegal copies of existing fonts coincides with ethics. Your own subject line was "Potentially stirring post: Akzidenz Grotesk". I cannot buy your story that you "didn't know it was illegal" -- if you really never knew, what was "potentially stirring" about your post?

Out-of-print books don't automatically become public domain. If outdated software isn't anymore on sale (e.g. Windows 98 or Photoshop 5 or QuarkXpress 4), it doesn't mean that you can copy it for free, does it? I don't understand why it should be different with fonts.

If you think pirating QuarkXPress 4.1 "for a just cause" is OK because the software isn't being sold anymore, I'd really like to hear about the foundations of this understanding of ethics that you have.

Regards,
Adam

Rodrigo, what confuses me the most

I

Word.

hhp

>Everyone else, just let it go.
>We're grown-ups here. Why must we act like politicians?

>Word.

True, true, and spoken by wiser men than me. I'll let go now.

Right, I'll try to put an end once and for all on this matter.

No, you may be sure I am not trying to turn it into a personal matter. I just misinterpreted you.

You say you don't beleive me when I said that I didn't know it was illegal. I won't say I am offended because you doubt my word, because you don't know me. But believe me: when I say something it is in earnest.

Why 'potentially stirring' then? Because in my original post I asked for what I thought was a discontinued font (which I thought was legal and was shown otherwise) but I said that the objective was to MODIFY that font for private use. That was the stirring bit, because when I asked how to link a discontinued font family many people said it was probably illegal to do so. So *that* was the stirring bit.

Finally. The law must be followed so that society does not collapse; but who makes the laws? Mostly people who are in power, lobbies and so forth. So there is every probability that some laws are not fair. When such a thing happens I reserve my right not to follow that law if in doing so I contribute to something worthy. Am I right? I believe so; am I acting outside the law? Yes; if I am caught in the act I will accept punishment. That is the only way it works: even if one does not agree with the law and feel contrived to act against it, one must be ready to suffer the consequences, because the law, even if unfair, is the only way to keep a society going.

This is, I think, very clear.

Mr Reynolds et al.: Too absurd to comment, sorry.

My interest in typography is strictly a hobby. I work for no one but the State.

I don't quite remember who said that I bumped the thread in order to cause a fight. But whoever said that was wrong. I just felt insulted by the concerted barrage of silence on what seemed to be an interesting topic before. So I responded calling your game. That is all. *I* have no hidden agendas.

>We're grown-ups here. Why must we act like politicians?<

Indeed. Why is everybody so offensive and distrustful?

As I said before, I won't mention the original question again: I mean, I wont doubt your word that it is illegal to ask for a discontinued fount. I won't reveal any of my sources.

And, from now on, I will ignore any insulting post. If you want a fight, you make it.

Rodrigo de S