Typophile - A CHEATER? - Comments

Is this one added to: You

michielterpelle — Tue, 13 May 2008 00:22:58 -0700

Is this one added to: You thought we shouldn’t notice! ;)

Whew, thanks. To refer back

Curioustype — Wed, 19 Mar 2008 17:53:26 -0700

Whew, thanks. To refer back to an earlier mention of the movie Airplane, I was beginning to feel like that woman who was going nuts while this long line of people was waiting to smack her in the face. Or shoot her. Thanks for the anchor. And yes, I think this dog needs to be put down.

Help me, Asvetic, help me! I

Asvetic — Wed, 19 Mar 2008 17:15:43 -0700

Help me, Asvetic, help me! I beg you!

Chris, drop the mouse and step away from the computer.

Help me, Asvetic, help me! I

Curioustype — Wed, 19 Mar 2008 16:59:28 -0700

Help me, Asvetic, help me! I beg you!

Oh and about the appeal of

Curioustype — Wed, 19 Mar 2008 16:58:21 -0700

Oh and about the appeal of Typodermic fonts: regardless of what anyone thinks of Mr. Larabie’s production pace one way or the other, he’s certainly accomplished one thing: I probably like as many fonts appearing on his site as I do any other single site on the web, short of our current handful of massive empires. For my taste, the first thought that enters my head when looking at Gnoulane is Bureau Grotesque 31. But there also are fonts all over his site that I appreciate for a number of reasons.

I really do find interesting the approach to typography taken by both Mr. Larabie and Jos Buivenga; Jos offers wonderful fonts for free, but since so many people rain down on his site on a regular basis, he either does or logically could generate revenue that way. Mr. Larabie on the other hand has literally created something for just about everyone regardless of his or her taste and I know recently was among the top sellers of new fonts at my fonts.com. I see absolutely nothing wrong with either approach, or the one in which a typographer all but identifies him or herself by one or two iconic mega-families. I even have my own personal little approach to the strategy of font production, a bit different from those above.

My approach is to try and retain as much sanity as possible while the cerebral contractions of having just one type baby reduce my core to runny fried eggs. And when ready, try to minimize the number of times I keep trying to cram that baby right back in where it came from until its perfectly incubated. It has its own sort of efficiency in a way, and still needs a little work.

“Nice. What you’re

Curioustype — Wed, 19 Mar 2008 16:39:13 -0700

“Nice. What you’re getting at?”

Well, I know you created thousands of free fonts for some time before throwing your hat in the pay-font ring, and have set a robust pace when producing those. That said, regardless of what anyone’s opinion is on their appeal - and more on that in a second - I doubt there are many people who’ve either had their hands on or looked at up close the thousands upon thousands of fonts you have. That’s why I was surprised to read what you wrote about the level of originality in Muse. I kinda got the impression you didn’t believe they were all that similar. I get scared when I hear things like that coming from people like you because my immediate reflex/impulse is to immediately second-guess myself and pray like mad I’m not some unfortunate version of the emperor in his new clothes here.

That would be under ordinary circumstances. In this case, however, the similarities have been well-quantified, identified, and crucified.

As for allowing two designers to work out things like this in their own little corner of the courtyard - or believing it to be the most diplomatic dove approach, all that does is lay the benefit right back in the lap of those perhaps least deserving of it. Perhaps the coals could have been turned down a bit, agreed - still, I can’t imagine feeling all that guilty about forgetting to bake the Parachute entity a cake. I strongly believe people are overlooking two crucial points here - first, this thread has not been 100-percent ground-breaking the entire time, so doing anything but engaging in such dialogue would amount to nothing more than complicity. And second, much has been said about Paragraph’s failure to recognize the problem before releasing the font, which many here seem all-too-willing to forgive for the sake of peace.

As would I - if not for the fact that some Paragraph personnel have on this very site defended the originality of their work if not take outright offense when anyone even hints at suggesting otherwise. And in rather eloquent text that was anything but self-effacing. I therefore strongly disagree - I believe the energy and consideration the subject matter generates has in my mind been healthy. As long as this issue awaits an ethical, everybody’s happy conclusion, it should continue.

However, I do agree it has run its course and as I’ve said earlier, probably a good candidate for total deletion. When it was unresolved and still being hotly debated, ending it would’ve been the worst thing to do since it would relieved those responsible of any sense of urgency to correct it. I believe it has been, and from THIS point forward any damage Parachute might incur would be arguably underserved. Still there’s a little voice in me that keeps echoing a basic philosophy ... we all end up being held accountable for what we do and produce, which isn’t abusive to us or even something we can piss and moan about before trying to outrun it.

To suggest a single person here might be in any way to blame for clouds that form over Parachute because of this would be a misguided attribution.

That point I made about

typodermic — Wed, 19 Mar 2008 14:50:39 -0700

That point I made about point theft vs. plagiarism makes no sense. Please disregard. And I’m not saying I haven’t accused someone of the same thing. I regret doing it. I’ve been accused and an accuser and I can see that it’s not a good way to go.

> Wow, I’m particularly

typodermic — Wed, 19 Mar 2008 14:46:44 -0700

> Wow, I’m particularly surprised by this statement, considering the author.

Nice. What you’re getting at?

Speaking abstractly, not

Miss Tiffany — Wed, 19 Mar 2008 14:22:31 -0700

Speaking abstractly, not specifically about this thread.

> Before you publicly accuse someone of plagiarism, contact them first becuase there may be a rational explanation.

I’ll third that. As a moderator I wonder about threads like this all the time. It doesn’t help that I’ve actually received email from lawyers and designers before either. As I’ve mentioned, standing up for each other is great, but it easily crosses a line without anyone have those intentions to begin with. From now on please email the designer off-list. Let the designer do what they think is best. (Which would include, I hope, contacting the people in question, not running to start a thread.) Then perhaps once it has been settled you can, if you still wish, start a thread here in an effort to keep education running.

“I just thought these

dezcom — Wed, 19 Mar 2008 14:21:13 -0700

“I just thought these words were appropriate to more or less conclude this topic.”

I think Jos said it best above and implied that we should all now move on and let this thread end.

ChrisL

“but what we’re looking

Curioustype — Wed, 19 Mar 2008 14:14:13 -0700

“but what we’re looking at here isn’t clearly point theft. Before you going (sic) to publicly accuse, make absolutely sure you’re right.”

Wow, I’m particularly surprised by this statement, considering the author. Unlike the designer/studio, neither of which made sure they were right about Delicious being an open-source font, I am going to second Jos’ sentiment here and state I don’t need to see the points before being able to identify them as copied.

However, if some feel that observation doesn’t carry enough substance to vocalize an all-out accusation ... or if some feel - as you seem to - that Muse and Delicious do not share enough similarities to constitute “piracy” or whatever, all I can say is this:

1.) Eventually the designer of Muse himself came on here and admitted being “influenced” by Delicious, which verifies the connection at the very least.

2.) Jos, the designer of Delicious, saw his font in “Muse” almost instantly ... kind of like a father or mother could pick their child’s voice out of a party crowd or verify it sight unseen.

3.) I know there were a few visual examples posted above, which are quite compelling - but in my opinion not even the best representations of what’s taken place here. Off the top of my head I can think of virtually exact duplicates also existing in the lower-case b, c, d, f, p, q, s, v, w, x, y and z. The numbers are nearly indistinguishable. Even the upper case “P” isn’t “land-locked” to borrow from one of my own terms to describe the unclosed-look.

And finally, I think one of Delicious’s most impressive features is it isn’t what I’d call cookie-cutter, despite being a clean, solid sans. There are subtle, unique features all over that font unlike any other sans I’ve seen. I’m not comparing Jos’s achievement to the parting of the Red Sea by any means ... all I’m saying is, the uniqueness of Delicious - in addition to being evident upon closer look - also made these similarities that much easier to identify. A sans serif font almost inherently restrains a designer from the start, but with Delicious, Jos still managed to give the font its own distinctive appearance (i.e., the lower-case e, f, v, w, etc.) and made what the outlines dictate should look like a pure square-sans into something artistic and in primitive terms, curvy.

Every now and then when I quickly glance at Delicious it reminds me of Quadraat Headliner, but only for a moment. I don’t think I spent a single moment looking at Muse without immediately tying it to Delicious.

>Before you publicly accuse

sii — Wed, 19 Mar 2008 12:45:06 -0700

>Before you publicly accuse someone of plagiarism, contact them first becuase there may be a rational explanation.

This might be a good policy to enshrine on the Typophile code of conduct. I constantly worry when I see threads like this that typophile might get shuttered due to some over-zealous designer sending their lawyers after Jared and Joe :-(

It’s not the first time

typodermic — Wed, 19 Mar 2008 11:55:30 -0700

It’s not the first time there’s been a plagiarism dogpile on this site. Point piracy is one thing. Designers know whether of not they’ve drawn points or copied them. Before you publicly accuse someone of plagiarism, contact them first becuase there may be a rational explanation.

About 10 years ago, a client(pro-bono) sent me scans of lettering in a 1960s high-school yearbook drawn by an anonymous illustrator. A few years later, I received an irate email from someone who designed a similar font in the mid 1990s. When I saw the font in question it was obvious that my client had tricked me. I underestimated how low people can sink to save $50. I apologized to the designer, removed the font from my site and asked about 50 of the most popular freeware sites to remove it. I am thankful that they contacted me first rather than raking me across the Typophile coals.

In 2001, a client commissioned me to create a font (based on Zero Hour) which I ended up calling Xirod. The client had very specific requirements and even required me to sign a contract to ensure that it would be released as freeware. I thought it was a strange request but the idea seemed original to me. After I released it, I noticed a similar free font called Battlefield. Luckily I didn’t go with all of the clients recommendations so it didn’t turn out exactly the same . . . but it easily could have.

When fonts are commissioned by a client, they often have very specific requests. On two other occasions, partway through a project, I caught on to the ruse and convinced the client to take the project in a different direction.

Sometimes designers are inspired by the same “classic” fonts that I am and accuse me of stealing their ideas. I won’t embarrass anyone by citing examples here. Many font designers have the same old metal type specimen books in their bookcase that I have.

Yeah, I publicly pointed out Intellecta’s point theft of one of my discontinued freeware fonts, but what we’re looking at here isn’t clearly point theft. Before you going to publicly accuse, make absolutely sure you’re right.

As for low blows or being

Jos Buivenga — Wed, 19 Mar 2008 11:00:22 -0700

As for low blows or being above some of the things appearing in this thread, sometimes making an omelete requires cracking a few skulls

I guess you’re right. Thanks to all the cracking this thread probably did resolve this thing. I didn’t meant to be moralistic citing Tiffany. I just thought these words were appropriate to more or less conclude this topic.

Thanks Jos, for the Fonts!

You’re very welcome!

>can someone please take

loremipsum — Wed, 19 Mar 2008 08:41:57 -0700

>can someone please take Bank Gothic and make a revival that FIXES all the hideous mistakes Morris made back at the turn of the 20th century?

Another new one here:

http://www.myfonts.com/fonts/alphabetsoup/bank-gothic-as/regular/

A CHEATER?

Curioustype — Sun, 16 Mar 2008 21:06:06 -0700

The proprietor of the site parachute.gr has in a different forum complained about TTF versions of his fonts being hacked and said to one member that he’d appreciate it if that member would buy his fonts instead of obtaining them in some unethical way.

However, perhaps someone can visit this page:

http://www.parachute.gr/fonts.aspx?Sample=1&FontStyleID=&FontFamilyID=53...

and tell me how the font “Muse” could not be so blatantly ripped off from Jos Buivenga’s “Delicious.” Which can clearly be seen in the lower case f, g, c, and s, and certainly seen in the remainder of the lower case letters. For that matter, with the exception of a few minor tweaks and added “serifs,” the outlines are virtually identical.

Shameful.