Quote:
Originally Posted by GERGE
It was Apache, now it is OFL. There isn't really any practical differences.
|
The SIL OFL license was designed specifically for typography, and issues related to using fonts. For typographers, Google putting the NoTo fonts under the OFL license is a thing most welcome.
For general users, they won't have the unpleasant experience of discovering that their masterpiece can only be distributed under The GNU GPL 3.0, because, even though the underlying font was distributed under the Apache License, the font designer chose to include some GNU GPL 3.0 design code with their redesign.
Amber