Interesting, I didn't know that some countries don't give protection to typefaces.

Does that mean that if you take a commercial font file and strip the bytecode, retaining only the glyph shapes, you can do as you wish with the result? And does that mean all bitmap fonts are actually public domain in the US?

Protecting a typeface itself would be super annoying. Every document you make, every billboard put up, every word on every sign, menu, signs on every vehicle on the road, would need to have its fonts explicitly licensed for those uses, the way webfonts are today. Complete with rules like “you can use our typeface on a sign, but if the sign is in a town over 10,000 population, we want $100, and if it’s a city over 1 million, we want $10,000. Oh, and all of this is per year.”

Also, good luck even making a free font without being accused of making a “derivative work” of every copyright-encumbered font that’s come before. (“look at those serifs!”)

I know I started the thread by saying I think fonts deserve copyright, and I do, but not the typefaces themselves, as that would drastically disrupt what you can create. It would be especially arbitrary considering most faces are derivative of what came before, stretching back centuries. To paraphrase a famous quote, “You didn’t build that, [Adobe]”

Stripping the bytecode may make the font look ugly at low display resolutions, though many modern font rendering programs use various auto-hinting algorithms to alleviate that (which were invented in order to circumvent the patents that could forbid the execution of the bytecode).

I don’t know what bytecode really is in this context, but a plain old vector image is a program too, so i don’t know of any process which would (in US law) let you convert a font into something public-domain.

(other than rasterizing text with it, at which point the output is not a “font” in the sense we usually mean when we use that term.)