Typophile

Adobe CS3 release OpenType Fonts

Scott Leyes

May not be the right forum, but...

Does anybody here know if the Opentype fonts Adobe is shipping with CS3 (Creative Suite 3) are updated/altered versions of their fonts? The files’ modification dates show March 2007, where my older Adobe files show 2003. I don’t want to replace my existing files, but at the same time, don’t want to have issues with older fonts.

I notice that some faces are “new” additions, while some have been dropped; Adobe Garamond Pro, for example, is included on the disk, but only in four weights (regular/italic/bold/bolditalic), while their earlier release (which I think came with CS2) includes the semibold/semibolditalic weights. Nueva Std, on the other hand, includes four new weights: boldcondensed, boldcondensedoblique, condensed, and condensedoblique. And they’ve thrown in venerable fonts like Prestige Elite — I’m hoping the metrics haven’t gone all wonky and will screw up older docs (though I’ll leave the PostScript version on my system just in case).

I’ve long since developed the habit of just updating the fonts. I’ve never had any re-flow issues ... if that is what you mean.

> Does anybody here know if the Opentype fonts Adobe is shipping with CS3 (Creative Suite 3) are updated/altered versions of their fonts?

As far as I know, the fonts are the same version as the ones that shipped with CS2 (e.g. AGaramondPro-Regular.otf is version 1.007 in both CS2 and CS3).

> (though I’ll leave the PostScript version on my system just in case)

Keep in mind that the (PostScript) Type 1 versions of some fonts are NOT necessarily fully compatible with their corresponding OpenType (CFF) versions.

> I’m hoping the metrics haven’t gone all wonky and will screw up older docs

If you want to be on the safe side, you could always store a copy of the font along with the project’s files. (I believe this is a common practice among editors/publishers, not necessarily because of eventual metric changes between font versions)

If you want to be on the safe side, you could always store a copy of the font along with the project’s files

Which solves potential compatibility problems at the expense of probably violating the “Number of Copies” portion of the Font license. I suppose you could buy a license for more copies, but then you’d have to update it from time to time as the fonts were used for more & more projects.

I think “number of copies” refers to on separate media. If you have 10 copies of the same font one one hard drive, I think you are cool. I am sure a EULLA expert will jump in soon, right Tiff?

ChrisL

I know my main lawyer views that clause differently than Chris does, although as a practical matter I like Miguel’s solution.

Regards,

T

Gotta love lawyers:-)
Too bad they never had to keep track of 1,000 design jobs and keep them ready for printing when a client call back 2 years later.

ChrisL

Chris, unless you really like to throw the dice, you get your completed projects OFF the hard drive & burn a CD.

In fact, Miguel mentioned publishers, who routinely insist on a copy to the job on a CD which includes a set of PDF files and the InDesign (or other application) files. Most also “require” the fonts used, but we refuse that one.

Miguel is right, it does make sense, and I’m here to tell you, it is also common.

I hear you Charles, I have oh-so been there :-)

ChrisL

I think everything has been covered. Storing the fonts with a given project would probably be seen a gray area anyway. But never make assumptions when it comes to the law. It is better to err on the safe side. Especially if your archives might be accessed by other people whom do not have authorization or license to use the fonts.

You could put the fontfiles in a passwordprotected zip-file. That way unauthorised use is prevented. In a broader sense you could do that with the complete backup…
Problem solved?
___
Bert Vanderveen BNO

Bert: yes, and the best thing about Zip is that when you forget the password, it’s so easy to use “password recovery” tools.

Let me take this opportunity to point out that for OFL’ed fonts, none of this would be a problem. I know the range and quality of designs aren’t there yet, but for specific clients (maybe nonprofits who need to repurpose the work for lots of different media, but don’t have a budget to buy fonts themselves), it might on occasion make sense to limit oneself to fonts available under those licensing terms, in exchange for the added flexibility and, dare I say, freedom.

Purely as an exercise, check out Net Library.

http://company.netlibrary.com/PublisherPartners.aspx

A good company. Non-profit. Look at the publishers listed and number of titles available.

Oh, by the way, the PDF a publisher sends to NetLibrary has to have the fonts fully embedded. A little different issue than the “number of copies” portion of the EULA, but an indication of what real world practices actually are.

> Which solves potential compatibility problems at the expense of probably violating the “Number of Copies” portion of the Font license.

You’re right. If the “Number of Copies” becomes an issue, one can always do the other way around: store text files next to the fonts’ backup, detailing where and when they were used. This practice also has the benefit of helping the font licensor calculate how much return s/he got from them.

Captured from web.archive.org on 25 Aug 2007. view this capture