Just because a category is fuzzy doesn’t make it invalid. That’s whynwe have laws to force standardized definitions of various concepts. You arguing against whatever definition I proposed would indict only that definition, and not the broader concept that there is an important line to begin with.
So, as far as I can tell, your arguments are that that a normal font is nothing more than the alphabet, therefore there’s no art in it, and therefore the creator shouldn’t have any claim to it.
My argument is that every detail is an artistic choice, and that simply making it look aesthetically pleasing or distinctive is art. If fonts weren’t art, why would people even bother with different looking fonts?
But regardless of the art question, if the creator can’t license their fonts, it would mean that they get no compensation for when some company uses their work.
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: [email protected]
Video game news oriented community. No NanoUFO is not a bot :)
Posts.
News oriented content (general reviews, previews or retrospectives allowed).
Broad discussion posts (preferably not only about a specific game).
No humor/memes etc…
No affiliate links
No advertising.
No clickbait, editorialized, sensational titles. State the game in question in the title. No all caps.
No self promotion.
No duplicate posts, newer post will be deleted unless there is more discussion in one of the posts.
No politics.
Comments.
No personal attacks.
Obey instance rules.
No low effort comments(one or two words, emoji etc…)
Please use spoiler tags for spoilers.
My goal is just to have a community where people can go and see what new game news is out for the day and comment on it.
Just because a category is fuzzy doesn’t make it invalid. That’s whynwe have laws to force standardized definitions of various concepts. You arguing against whatever definition I proposed would indict only that definition, and not the broader concept that there is an important line to begin with.
So, as far as I can tell, your arguments are that that a normal font is nothing more than the alphabet, therefore there’s no art in it, and therefore the creator shouldn’t have any claim to it.
My argument is that every detail is an artistic choice, and that simply making it look aesthetically pleasing or distinctive is art. If fonts weren’t art, why would people even bother with different looking fonts?
But regardless of the art question, if the creator can’t license their fonts, it would mean that they get no compensation for when some company uses their work.
You understood my arguments correctly. But I have since had my mind changed by [email protected] so please forgive my ignorance.