For Approval: IPA Font License v1.0

[Michael Tiemann]

I think that Bruce makes strong points both with respect to OSD  #4  
and OSD #2.  I believe that if we are to take the position that  
"source" and "binary" are the same when considering fonts, then we  
should do one of the two things:

1a.  Interpret the OSD compatibility of the license assuming we use  
the source terms to govern the binary distributions, and if the source  
terms are too restrictive to binary distributions, reject the license
1b.  Interpret the OSD compatibility of the license assuming we use  
the binary terms to govern the source distributions, and if the binary  
terms are too restrictive to the source terms, reject the license

If either 1a or 1b says reject, then reject.  It seems to me that  
Bruce has raised issues that will make approval difficult without some  
modification to the license.

2.  Clarify in the license that the font code belongs specifically to  
the category of "source" or "binary" with respect to the OSD, and then  
judge whether the terms of the license are OSD-compliant with respect  
to that single class.  This would likely slow down approval because it  
would require us to think about approval in a completely new way.

M