Re: Typographic copyright (was: Emory HTML claim)

Terry Carroll writes:
>
> I remain astounded that one can believe that typeface designs are
> categorically not works of authorship. The careful and aesthetic
> judgment that goes into a typeface design is exactly the type of
> artistic expression that copyright is designed to protect. While I
> will readily concede that many typefaces would be essentially copies
> of preexisting works without the modicum of originality needed to
> support a copyright, carving out typefaces as a specific category of
> work not to be protected is simply without any sound basis in fact.
>

In general, I agree: claims that "x is never subject to copyright protection" are rarely universally true, and I can certainly imagine a typeface that contains original expression.

But what would be the scope of such protection? Presumably it would be copyright infringement to copy the computer program implementing the font -- no problem there. Would it also be infringement to print a document using that font without permission to use the font? If I want to photocopy a journal article, do I now have to worry about identifying and contacting the font owner as well as the author for permission?

Mark Lemley
Assistant Professor, University of Texas School of Law Of Counsel, Fish & Richardson, P.C.
mlemley[_at_]mail.law.utexas.edu Received on Mon Mar 18 1996 - 16:29:58 GMT