Typography and Copyright

I don't know how many people are familiar with the new @font-face CSS rule now available for the most recent versions of FireFox, Safari, Opera, and Chrome, but it's been a revelation to me this week. If the letters C-S-S make you want to stop reading don't worry, this isn't a post about code. But to give you some background in case you haven't heard about @font-face, it's a CSS code that allows web designers to embed typefaces. With @font-face visitors do not need to have the fonts installed on their computer. Instead they are loaded from the site itself. This kind of technology would make it easier for companies like IKEA to use the same typeface across all media without having to resort to Verdana. If the technology takes off it could mean the days of only being able to use 11 web-safe typefaces could be behind us.



The catch? Most font foundries are unwilling to allow their typefaces to be embedded, fearing the fonts could be downloaded and used by anyone. They are want some kind of digital rights management (DRM) before they will get on board. [If you're not familiar with DRM, it's a term for technologies intended to restrict the use and distribution of digital files] As a person who hopes to one day be paid for my ideas, I can appreciate the dilemma the foundries are facing, but I really question whether DRM is the solution for two reasons. The first being that, font files themselves don't use any kind of DRM. Files can be copied and distributed to anyone. I have worked at companies where typefaces are routinely sent from designers to editor, typesetters, and printers. I honestly don't know if this is a violation of the end-user license agreement (I suspect it would depend on the agreement), but I don't think it's an uncommon occurrence. The point being that if someone wants to get their hands on these fonts for free it's not very difficult to do so. The industry already depends largely on the honor system and has for sometime.




My second objection is to DRM in general. Typography is facing the same challenges as other creative media--how to successfully monetize the sale of electronic content without risking unauthorized distribution. However, the trend in music at least is moving away from DRM (iTunes announced in January of this year that they would be doing away with DRM on their content while Amazon abandoned the use back in 2007). Why? Because while it discourages casual copying, it is ineffective at stopping someone who is determined to circumvent it. And it does so at the expense of loyal customers who are then restricted in how they can use the content.



I don't expect foundries to give away their typefaces for free, but I would like to see them extend the licensing agreement to include embedding fonts for the web. After all restricting how I use the typefaces I paid for because someone else might steal them doesn't seem fair. I understand that embracing this new technology and making fonts so accessible is risky, but I think foundries that are willing to embrace what could be the future of web design will find themselves better off for having taken the risk.

I don't know. Any thoughts?

The images I included come from this site, which uses a number of interesting quotes from various parties on the pros and cons of the technology to demonstrate some of the best free fonts currently available for @font-face embedding.

Some other interesting (and spirited) articles on the topic:
CSS @ Ten: The Next Big Thing
The Potential of Web Typography
21 Awesome @font-face Embeddable Typefaces
Fuck the Foundries
Free Fonts Manifesto