Licensing fonts - an infringer’s dilemma
I’ve had some minor interest in typography for years. Ever since I discovered that I didn’t have to use Times New Roman, I’ve come to (unjustly) despise its ubiquity. The much-maligned Comic Sans and Papyrus have been written about elsewhere. I railed against the expectation in undergraduate interpretation of APA that everything be written in Times New, and given some tenuous and half-remembered article about how novel fonts raise grades, I selected alternatives such as Georgia or Verdana. I reveled in the discovery of a whole selection of new fonts from Microsoft, and set about writing reports and essays in Cambria (Constantia, unfortunately, uses text figures and is not appropriate for research reports).
As I began to create resumes, cover letters and other documents that represent me professionally, I realised that typeface, content layout and visual flow contributed substantively to how a document was considered. Selecting a typeface (or pair, for contrast) would allow for consistency in how I presented myself.
I download many things without paying for them or licensing them from the copyright holder; this is copyright infringement. I generally ignore the legal issues associated with infringement given Australia’s lack of widespread prosecution, and tend to sidestep around the ethical issues using the ‘I’d never buy it anyway’ (I might) excuse, the ‘I don’t want to wait 6 months for it to get to Australia’ (I still don’t buy it when it’s here) excuse, or the ‘Big companies are evil and must be punished’ (true, but fails to address artists/creators who lose out) excuse.
I downloaded the complete font catalogue of Hoefler & Frere-Jones, an exceptional font foundry who designed Gotham, the font used by Obama in his presidential campaign, Verlag, a variant of a font designed for the Guggenheim, and so on. I was immediately captivated by Whitney and its Condensed variant, enjoying its clarity in small widths, and its similarity to Arial Narrow made the latter suitable for substitution in a pinch. The heading for this tumblr page is in Whitney Condensed, the text in Arial Narrow.
After using the fonts for a year, I began to grow concerned. My continued usage of the font without licensing failed all three excuses. I fell back on fourth and least-defensible excuse: I really didn’t want to pay A$180 for a font. I’ve sought and found evidence to support my position from H&FJ, who explicitly prohibit the use of licensed fonts on documents that are publicly available. That means no downloadable PDFs of resumes, position papers, newsletters, and so on. I also can’t purchase a single license and use the font on my Mac, for writing, as well as on my PC, for designing.
Where does this leave me? I’m reaching the point where I consider it unethical to financially or professionally benefit from a font I don’t have a license for. However, if I were to license the font, most of what I’d do with it would be in violation of the license. Does purchasing a license in order to assuage my guilt while intending to violate its terms put me in a better ethical position than doing nothing at all?
Comments, please, to @areiamus.