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