[Reuse questions. Very short summary: how to attribute if the law demands attribution and is skeptical towards pseudonyms; how to use if the author may forbid interference on his works?]
Preface
I don't know if you can help me, but I will try.
While the font is licensed, I have two problems. They have to do with the author's "moral rights". Namely, author may have an attribution right and a right to prohibit certain modifications, which isn't destroyed by the license. So I have 5 questions.
The post
Important note: simple "yes" to a question means acceptance as written here, with the same terms, excluding situations where it's clearly seen that the written text wasn't accepted.
Firstly, in my country attribution right can't be waived. And courts often count pseudonymous usage as "invalid attribution", making the reuser liable. That's because people have real names, and not only pseudonyms...
With regard to it, I have 3 questions:
1. Is the real name of the author kept in secret or undisclosed by the author? Can I use in while attributing, or not?
valid and sufficient attribution information, including for any amount of usage (infinitely many works, maybe created in different situations and for different usage) and for perpetual period of time, where hyperlinks may be presented as a simple text, not actually linking to somewhere, or may be presented as hyperlinks, at my own discretion.
3. Specifially, do you agree with PSEUDONYMOUS attribution to you for any amount of usage (infinitely many works, maybe created in different situations and for different public usage) and for perpetual period of time?
Secondly, author may have a right to prohibit certain actions (changes, interferences) with his/her work without his/her permission separately from the rights owner.
(See part *, it is moved.)
1. Are all these actions allowed in general to do with the font, and without violation of the moral right of the author that prohibits interference, for all use cases?
2. If not or this is not possible by law, can the actions mentioned below be allowed in my case (all types of aforementioned modifications). Here is it:
[I want]
What to do: to create documents with text or any other content (defined as work in law), and to use it at home, at/for an educational institution (including not only learning, but also a labour relationship with the educational instituation), to any person, legal or physical, i will work for, including standard work, situations where the contract was for one-time or non-regular work or when services were given by me for monetary compensation even in the event of contract absense, or any other situations which are similar to "work" in nature, defined as broadly as possible.
Time: the actions will be allowed for perpetual period of time.
Quantity of usage: the actions will be allowed for any amount of usage (infinitely many works, maybe created in different situations and for different usage).
BONUS QUESTIONS.
Bonus question 1. If the font is licensed via the same license, but is not this font, is it possible to apply the answer to the another font? Why did I ask the questions: because there are others similarly licensed fonts (this includes only the same license), and these questions are important for these fonts too.
Bonus question 2. Can I save the page for a proof?
Bonus question 3. And can I translate this, including with publication here or without a publication, for a proof?
Thank you, if you could help me somehow. I simply want to decrease the risks of liablity to the further extent possible. Again, thanks.
(Part *):
These actions primarily include any interference with the work, any influence on the work, but interference is being understood in a very general sense, as anything that, a little or a lot, changes the work or interferes with the work, regardless of the result, and also as a change of things that are "around" a work, "near" a work, because this also influences the work perception and may violate the right of author to communicate his idea. It is understood that any "change" is "interference", therefore.
Interference includes also, for example, any addition and subtraction of any Content if it was done with regards to a certain work; certain other things. Any interference always result in a change to the work in a broadest meaning possible (examples: addition, substraction, other things), and a change to the work is always considered interference, though interference is not required to be disruptive to be prohibited without author's consent. Content here is defined very broadly: it may not be part of the work, content here may not be authored by interfering person, and content here may even be "around" a work, "near" a work (not only inside a work). A Preface to this post is also to be example of Content with regards to the post as work, including any analogies this may arise, should similar information in the broadest sense be placed at any place of the work (Preface placed at any place of the work), it's nonetheless will become Content, even if it is not named "Preface", but by the nature of copyright law it's similar information, or is a version of a preface placed in a certain place that is not standard for a preface. Should any doubts arise about any text, if it is Content or not, it will be Content.
These paragraphs (paragraphs from the part *) to the further extent possible must be thought of in terms of civil law of Russia, and must to the further extent possible suggest an authors' moral right, and they are to be interpreted in a way that all applicable permissions for normal reuse of the work are to be given to the reuser should the author agree to it, and the reuser will be non-infringing, should the author agree to these terms.
I recognize that certain individuals may have worries regarding legal matters and copyright issues. Nevertheless, the font is available under the Creative Commons Zero v1.0 Universal license, which explicitly details the permissible uses. If it does not align with the regulations in your country, I suggest refraining from using it.
[So, is pseudonymous usage with attribution notice as written below allowed by the author, even when pseudonym isn't a real name? So, is using a font for a text document (for any time, for any number of documents) considered an "unauthorized change"? Is it allowed?]
Medium version.
I don't know, maybe I failed to communicate that, but the questions were "do you allow pseudonymous use, with the specific text that was presented above" and "is a change of using the font as a font to create texts allowed" while using the font according the license. (The time of usage of the work is not limited [indefinite], the works count is unlimited.)
The possible answers are therefore: "Yes, I do allow pseudonymous use, with the specific text that was presented above" or "No, I do not allow..." (with the same text), and "a change of using the font as a font to create texts is allowed" [is not allowed] - for any amount of time (indefinite time period), for any number of documents, when using the font according to the license.
Long version.
Thanks for comment. I understand that might be boring to read, anyways. Sorry about that.
No, it's not true that the license isn't valid in my country. The license, really, is valid in my country. I'm pretty sure that, in my country, that's a valid license and a valid way to license works.
The problem is... so-called "moral rights" of the author. While these licenses are perfectly valid in my country, authors may have right to choose how they are to be attributed, and they may forbid some modifications to their work.
What I want to do is to simply use fonts for my text works (for infinite time, for infinite amount of works, to "use as a font"). The attribution message I want to insert is: "Шрифт: автором является GGBotNet, https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/legalcode.en , название работы и источник - https://ggbot.itch.io/jupiteroid-font , приспособлено под данный документ, но не изменено.".
What I don't want to get is a lawsuit about the fact that "real name wasn't inserted in an attribution message" or "the work was changed without author's permission". Considering the latter, there is a change right that is not licensiable, and instead remains at a sole discretion of an author "not as the rights owner, but as an author". (The question is about that right.) It's also dubious that using a font actually will trigger that "change" right, as the letters themselves are not changed, and a text document is created instead.
In short, I don't think there is any real problem with usage of the font, because the licenses are accepted in my country. But:
[this may be translated]
1) can I use the font, following the license (for infinite time, for infinite amount of works, to "use as a font" in works), without inserting an author's real name, just with inserting a pseudonym (a name that isn't real, but is used by the author in the Internet). The full attribution notice will be as written above? Can you allow this usage? If you would instead to prefer to be attributed by real name, by what name (if you, of course, agree to be published here with the real name) do you want to be attributed?
2) don't simple normal usage of a font - for my text works (for infinite time, for infinite amount of works, to "use as a font" in works) - consitute a "change" that is not allowed by the author, if the work is used while following the license? Can you allow this usage?
[this is the end of the text that may be translated, "yes" = да, "no" = "нет"]
If I would get a proof that these uses are normal and not violations, at least I could say something to a court in case of a lawsuit.
Some more notes:
1. The licenses like this ARE actually allowed in my country. I'm sure about it. But there are still possible risks of a "moral rights trolling", like saying that the pseudonymous name isn't the real author's name, and this is a violation, or the author forbids a "change" (though the last one is dubious and will probably fail).
2. Of course, the best thing you can do is not to reuse works. However, people need to write text in the Internet somehow, including in documents, and some people just use the first font they find without reading any licensing conditions. Every action incurs risks, anyways, and sometimes not only legal. There are also patents, for example (this probably isn't patented anyway, but if it would be patented, the risks still would be there).
3. If not a secret, do you have any plans on sueing reusers?
Anyways, thank. But if I would get info that pseudonymous usage (with above notice) and a change "using this as a font inside of the text work" is explicitly allowed for infinite amount of works, for infinite amount of time and isn't in violation of any moral rights, as the author thinks, I would be very glad?
All I want to know is can I use a name instead of pseudonym (and insert an above-looking attribution notice) and can I "change" the font by using it in documents, if it would be considered "change". I don't think it's a hard question, though...
← Return to asset pack
Comments
Log in with itch.io to leave a comment.
[Reuse questions. Very short summary: how to attribute if the law demands attribution and is skeptical towards pseudonyms; how to use if the author may forbid interference on his works?]
Preface
I don't know if you can help me, but I will try.
While the font is licensed, I have two problems. They have to do with the author's "moral rights". Namely, author may have an attribution right and a right to prohibit certain modifications, which isn't destroyed by the license. So I have 5 questions.
The post
Important note: simple "yes" to a question means acceptance as written here, with the same terms, excluding situations where it's clearly seen that the written text wasn't accepted.
Firstly, in my country attribution right can't be waived. And courts often count pseudonymous usage as "invalid attribution", making the reuser liable. That's because people have real names, and not only pseudonyms...
With regard to it, I have 3 questions:
1. Is the real name of the author kept in secret or undisclosed by the author? Can I use in while attributing, or not?
2. Is
"Шрифт: автором является GGBotNet, https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/legalcode.en , название работы и источник - https://ggbot.itch.io/jupiteroid-font , приспособлено под данный документ, но не изменено." (in Russian)
valid and sufficient attribution information, including for any amount of usage (infinitely many works, maybe created in different situations and for different usage) and for perpetual period of time, where hyperlinks may be presented as a simple text, not actually linking to somewhere, or may be presented as hyperlinks, at my own discretion.
The translation (IT WILL NOT BE ACTUALLY USED, I WILL ACTUALLY USE THE RUSSIAN ATTRIBUTION TEXT) is "Font: the author is GGBotNet, https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/legalcode.en , the name of the work and the source of the work is https://ggbot.itch.io/jupiteroid-font, adapted for this document, but not changed.".
3. Specifially, do you agree with PSEUDONYMOUS attribution to you for any amount of usage (infinitely many works, maybe created in different situations and for different public usage) and for perpetual period of time?
Secondly, author may have a right to prohibit certain actions (changes, interferences) with his/her work without his/her permission separately from the rights owner.
(See part *, it is moved.)
1. Are all these actions allowed in general to do with the font, and without violation of the moral right of the author that prohibits interference, for all use cases?
2. If not or this is not possible by law, can the actions mentioned below be allowed in my case (all types of aforementioned modifications). Here is it:
[I want]
What to do: to create documents with text or any other content (defined as work in law), and to use it at home, at/for an educational institution (including not only learning, but also a labour relationship with the educational instituation), to any person, legal or physical, i will work for, including standard work, situations where the contract was for one-time or non-regular work or when services were given by me for monetary compensation even in the event of contract absense, or any other situations which are similar to "work" in nature, defined as broadly as possible.
Time: the actions will be allowed for perpetual period of time.
Quantity of usage: the actions will be allowed for any amount of usage (infinitely many works, maybe created in different situations and for different usage).
BONUS QUESTIONS.
Bonus question 1. If the font is licensed via the same license, but is not this font, is it possible to apply the answer to the another font? Why did I ask the questions: because there are others similarly licensed fonts (this includes only the same license), and these questions are important for these fonts too.
Bonus question 2. Can I save the page for a proof?
Bonus question 3. And can I translate this, including with publication here or without a publication, for a proof?
Thank you, if you could help me somehow. I simply want to decrease the risks of liablity to the further extent possible. Again, thanks.
(Part *):
These actions primarily include any interference with the work, any influence on the work, but interference is being understood in a very general sense, as anything that, a little or a lot, changes the work or interferes with the work, regardless of the result, and also as a change of things that are "around" a work, "near" a work, because this also influences the work perception and may violate the right of author to communicate his idea. It is understood that any "change" is "interference", therefore.
Interference includes also, for example, any addition and subtraction of any Content if it was done with regards to a certain work; certain other things. Any interference always result in a change to the work in a broadest meaning possible (examples: addition, substraction, other things), and a change to the work is always considered interference, though interference is not required to be disruptive to be prohibited without author's consent. Content here is defined very broadly: it may not be part of the work, content here may not be authored by interfering person, and content here may even be "around" a work, "near" a work (not only inside a work). A Preface to this post is also to be example of Content with regards to the post as work, including any analogies this may arise, should similar information in the broadest sense be placed at any place of the work (Preface placed at any place of the work), it's nonetheless will become Content, even if it is not named "Preface", but by the nature of copyright law it's similar information, or is a version of a preface placed in a certain place that is not standard for a preface. Should any doubts arise about any text, if it is Content or not, it will be Content.
These paragraphs (paragraphs from the part *) to the further extent possible must be thought of in terms of civil law of Russia, and must to the further extent possible suggest an authors' moral right, and they are to be interpreted in a way that all applicable permissions for normal reuse of the work are to be given to the reuser should the author agree to it, and the reuser will be non-infringing, should the author agree to these terms.
I enjoy the reading that wall of text!
I recognize that certain individuals may have worries regarding legal matters and copyright issues. Nevertheless, the font is available under the Creative Commons Zero v1.0 Universal license, which explicitly details the permissible uses. If it does not align with the regulations in your country, I suggest refraining from using it.
I do not force anyone to use my fonts!
Very short version:
[So, is pseudonymous usage with attribution notice as written below allowed by the author, even when pseudonym isn't a real name? So, is using a font for a text document (for any time, for any number of documents) considered an "unauthorized change"? Is it allowed?]
Medium version.
I don't know, maybe I failed to communicate that, but the questions were "do you allow pseudonymous use, with the specific text that was presented above" and "is a change of using the font as a font to create texts allowed" while using the font according the license. (The time of usage of the work is not limited [indefinite], the works count is unlimited.)
The possible answers are therefore: "Yes, I do allow pseudonymous use, with the specific text that was presented above" or "No, I do not allow..." (with the same text), and "a change of using the font as a font to create texts is allowed" [is not allowed] - for any amount of time (indefinite time period), for any number of documents, when using the font according to the license.
Long version.
Thanks for comment. I understand that might be boring to read, anyways. Sorry about that.
No, it's not true that the license isn't valid in my country. The license, really, is valid in my country. I'm pretty sure that, in my country, that's a valid license and a valid way to license works.
The problem is... so-called "moral rights" of the author. While these licenses are perfectly valid in my country, authors may have right to choose how they are to be attributed, and they may forbid some modifications to their work.
What I want to do is to simply use fonts for my text works (for infinite time, for infinite amount of works, to "use as a font"). The attribution message I want to insert is: "Шрифт: автором является GGBotNet, https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/legalcode.en , название работы и источник - https://ggbot.itch.io/jupiteroid-font , приспособлено под данный документ, но не изменено.".
What I don't want to get is a lawsuit about the fact that "real name wasn't inserted in an attribution message" or "the work was changed without author's permission". Considering the latter, there is a change right that is not licensiable, and instead remains at a sole discretion of an author "not as the rights owner, but as an author". (The question is about that right.) It's also dubious that using a font actually will trigger that "change" right, as the letters themselves are not changed, and a text document is created instead.
In short, I don't think there is any real problem with usage of the font, because the licenses are accepted in my country. But:
[this may be translated]
1) can I use the font, following the license (for infinite time, for infinite amount of works, to "use as a font" in works), without inserting an author's real name, just with inserting a pseudonym (a name that isn't real, but is used by the author in the Internet). The full attribution notice will be as written above? Can you allow this usage? If you would instead to prefer to be attributed by real name, by what name (if you, of course, agree to be published here with the real name) do you want to be attributed?
2) don't simple normal usage of a font - for my text works (for infinite time, for infinite amount of works, to "use as a font" in works) - consitute a "change" that is not allowed by the author, if the work is used while following the license? Can you allow this usage?
[this is the end of the text that may be translated, "yes" = да, "no" = "нет"]
If I would get a proof that these uses are normal and not violations, at least I could say something to a court in case of a lawsuit.
Some more notes:
1. The licenses like this ARE actually allowed in my country. I'm sure about it. But there are still possible risks of a "moral rights trolling", like saying that the pseudonymous name isn't the real author's name, and this is a violation, or the author forbids a "change" (though the last one is dubious and will probably fail).
2. Of course, the best thing you can do is not to reuse works. However, people need to write text in the Internet somehow, including in documents, and some people just use the first font they find without reading any licensing conditions. Every action incurs risks, anyways, and sometimes not only legal. There are also patents, for example (this probably isn't patented anyway, but if it would be patented, the risks still would be there).
3. If not a secret, do you have any plans on sueing reusers?
Anyways, thank. But if I would get info that pseudonymous usage (with above notice) and a change "using this as a font inside of the text work" is explicitly allowed for infinite amount of works, for infinite amount of time and isn't in violation of any moral rights, as the author thinks, I would be very glad?
All I want to know is can I use a name instead of pseudonym (and insert an above-looking attribution notice) and can I "change" the font by using it in documents, if it would be considered "change". I don't think it's a hard question, though...
Anyways, thank you.
Attribution is not required under CC0. However, if you prefer, I do permit credit to be attributed to the pseudonym GGBotNet.
The email is located on the profile page; ggbot.itch.io
Nice font! Thank's for cyrillic letters! <3
Disculpa puedo utilizarla en mi juego comercial? Daria creditos
Sí. https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/deed.es