> While *scripts* may not be able to be copyrighted (it'd be nice to see the > judgement on that D'Ni case you're referring to, depending on how broad or > was written, it might be useful as jurisprudence on conlangs too), *fonts* > definitely are! So you may not for instance claim copyright on the Latin > script, but Arial is definitely copyrighted! Once again, that's because > while a script is a concept, a font is the expression of such a concept, > which makes them a perfect fit for copyright. Not in the US. You can copyright software though, and lots of modern typefaces are shipped as something that the court considers software. More or less this means that it's legal to distribute images or printed material with any font you like, but not the (non-bitmap) font itself (or say, a pdf with the font embedded in it, unless it's fair use.) Patents and Trademarks still apply though. See <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intellectual_property_protection_of_typefaces> for better citations. tristan -- All original matter is hereby placed immediately under the public domain.