Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
This question does not appear to be about programming within the scope defined in the help center.
Closed 7 years ago.
Improve this question
I'm wondering what is the license of the fonts included with Windows. Does anybody know where I could find the EULA for them? In general, can I freely use these fonts in my open source software?
In general, I know I cannot distribute the font file itself, but how about simply displaying some text with this font? For example, Arial is used in many websites, I guess these websites don't pay some extra license fee to Microsoft?
The Arial wikipedia article describes the licensing terms of Microsoft fonts. And, it also specifies free alternatives available that are metrically equivalent to Arial. Liberation Sans is a good choice IMO. Look at relevant wiki articles to know all the free alternatives available.
Most of the Windows fonts are licensed to Ascender corporation. They now provide license for software and hardware developers to use them. See Type Foundry: Microsoft for more information, and the fonts available.
In addition to that, if you go to right-click -> properties, there's a tab called license. It provides the information about licensing terms as well.
When it comes to use of fonts like Arial in websites, I think it's allowed because the website itself doesn't embed the font, but merely specifies the font name. It's the browser that does the mapping. If you are talking about a stand-alone software, you need to have a closer look.
You are free to use the fonts supplied with Windows, free to write software that uses them, but you cannot distribute them.
Related
Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
Closed 8 years ago.
This question appears to be off-topic because it lacks sufficient information to diagnose the problem. Describe your problem in more detail or include a minimal example in the question itself.
This question does not appear to be about programming within the scope defined in the help center.
Improve this question
If I open a Chinese web page by a browser (ex: Chrome), the web page can show Chinese texts although I don't install Chinese fonts (only use available Windows fonts). However, on almost of Windows softwares, the Chinese texts are not displayed exactly. Ex: "ÐìÖÝ¿Ðý ĸ֮ËÀ". I don't know what fonts Chrome uses to display Chinese texts? Why other Windows softwares don't use these fonts?
Microsoft (and most Windows ISVs) has elected to use code pages for most of their software, which reduces memory and disk requirements at the cost of sacrificing portability. You'll need to use AppLocale if you want to run software that requires a code page other than the one used by the OS.
Unicode software, on the other hand, will display properly on any code page of Windows that has the appropriate fonts installed, but requires additional support on 9x versions of Windows.
A browser like Chrome is configured to display a default font for certain encoding, or it retrieves from its embedded font types the one suggested by the page mega tag's charset.
Sometimes if the browser guesses the wrong character encoding, you'll still see gibberish and have to manually select the correct encoding to display the character correctly.
For desktop application, either the font is within the environment, or you have to hard-code the font into the application.
Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
This question does not appear to be about programming within the scope defined in the help center.
Closed 7 years ago.
Improve this question
Can Google Web Fonts be legally used in commercial native Cocoa apps on OS X? Google says officially that one can use the fonts for free on commercial websites, but didn't state specifically the case with native apps.
Currently I've downloaded the font (in woff format) from the URL defined in CSS, converted it via an online tool to ttf and included it in my project.
From http://www.google.com/webfonts/#AboutPlace:about
"All of the fonts are Open Source. This means that you are free to share your favorites with friends and colleagues. You can even customize them for your own use, or collaborate with the original designer to improve them. And you can use them in every way you want, privately or commercially — in print, on your computer, or in your websites."
Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
This question does not appear to be about programming within the scope defined in the help center.
Closed 7 years ago.
Improve this question
What are the license restrictions surrounding the redistribution of Windows OSes as part of virtual demos?
I am looking to make available demo versions of my software as already installed and configured on a VHD (or whatever the VMWare equivalent is). I was told that this is not possible because MS does not allow the Windows OS to be redistributed that way (even trial/demo versions). Can anyone point me to a definitive source (MS license terms maybe?) that specifies what the requirements are? Or at least an official "this is not possible"?
MS seems to be distributing their virtual training labs and product demos more and more as a VHD download. I was hoping to be able to do the same.
Sure, it's very likely that you can distribute Windows as part of your demo, but you're going to have to buy a license for every copy. I'm assuming you wanted to avoid that.
Your sources are correct; this isn't possible. Microsoft distributes windows on VHD's for training and demonstration purposes because it can. I'm not aware of any organization being given permission to distribute Windows as you describe. You are not likely to find an official "this is not possible", simply because licenses define what you can do, not (in general) what you can't. Most of the prohibitions in a license agreement are stipulations that are part of the granting of some other right. You won't find a comprehensive list of what's disallowed, simply because that's obviously impossible.
The only way to get an official response is to ask your Microsoft representative, assuming that you have one (if your organization has an EA, for example, the EA representative would be the person to talk to).
Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
This question does not appear to be about programming within the scope defined in the help center.
Closed 7 years ago.
Improve this question
Do they have to be GPL or can they be something else? And if nothing is specified in the code are they considered to be GPL by default?
I'm not a lawyer, so take this with a grain of salt.
First off, Mozilla has nothing to do this. There is no reason to believe that Firefox add-ons are GPL-licensed by default. That's because the license of the browser doesn't affect the license of the add-ons; they don't typically reuse the browser's source code. (In fact, Firefox itself isn't necessarily GPL'd. Mozilla releases it under a tri-license which includes the Mozilla Public License as one of the license options.)
So, I'd imagine that if you don't specify a license to an add-on, then that add-on defaults to whatever copyright control would be extended to you as author of the add-on, depending on your jurisdiction.
Now if you used GPL'd code in your add-on, then that add-on would obviously be GPL-licensed if you released it publicly. Unless you got special permission from the original author to use a different license, of course.
Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
We don’t allow questions seeking recommendations for books, tools, software libraries, and more. You can edit the question so it can be answered with facts and citations.
Closed 8 years ago.
Improve this question
Within our company we use a proprietary template engine, which stores its templates in a MySQL database. We recently developed a WebDAV interface for this, which allows us to use standard tools to edit them, instead of a nasty <textarea>.
The standard operating-system webdav clients aren't great though, so for OS/X we went with Coda, which has amazing WebDAV support and saves us a ton of time.
Some of our devs are on Windows though, is anyone aware of a good editor that comes with built-in WebDAV support?
I ended up using Netdrive. Even though it has it's own share of problems (bad, bad multi-user support) the client behaves a lot smoother than Windows' and does a lot of built-in caching.
Upvoted both other answers for helpfulness
You can mount the WebDAV URI as a local drive and then access it using a standard editor, like notepad.exe or slightly fancier ones such as Notepad++.
The oXygen XML editor can use WebDAV. It might be worth checking if one can edit non XML files with it as well.
You can use a good FTP client (such as CrossFTP that handles SFTP, WebDav, and Amazon S3 protocols) to edit your remote files with your favorite editor.
There are Bluefish, gedit, Kate etc. They are primarily built for Linux but Windows ports are available in the links I have posted. They are all full blown editors too as you would hardly miss a feature. For questions like this the best source to have a primary lookup is wikipedia.
Microsoft Expression Web 4 is actually a good fit for this. As of December 2012 it is now free (as in beer) but unsupported (as in development has ceased).
I use it to edit HTML and CSS files and publish to my host via WebDAV. It does everything you would expect, syntax-highlighting, auto-complete, syncing changes and probably much more.
I am not terribly bothered by the fact that it is abandonware, it definitely is the best fit for my needs right now. More info on Wikipedia