by Splash 16 Replies latest watchtower bible
So with everything else being dissected, I want to know why it's important to have a font that can be copyrighted?
The font used is very similar to a number of others, like Tahoma, MS Sans Serif, and Arial etc, so what benefit is there to employing (in the loose sense of the word) a team in Japan to create a brand new western set of glyphs?
Will this help with their prosecution of those who copy/paste NNWT verses?
Splash
This may or may not shed some light ...
It's part of a larger straw man argument. Another distraction to talk about. When the fonts for the Watchtower were changed some years ago NO mention was made about it! It's just part of their larger "Oh look, we did SO MUCH FOR YOU!" argument.
It is often done to make it easier to retain copyright, as they own their unique font. It's a common practice by content creators.
Great question! What if you copy and paste the NNWT but changed the font to courier new or some other font?
LOL... I can see it now: "The One, True Font of Jehovah". Seeing this font in the new NWT (NNWT?) assures us that this is indeed the one, true translation of Jehovah's word. If you don't see other bibles in this copyrighted font, then you have an inferior, and inaccurate translation.
They might be able to take stuff off the internet on the sole basis that it is using their font or typeface and they wont need to argue that u se of its lit. May be a form of copying as opposed to commentary. It may serve to greatly limit commentary. Also if you change the font of it they can neutralize your critique by saying "well your quote is not an accurate quote cuz you are using the wrong font."
It is often done to make it easier to retain copyright, as they own their unique font. It's a common practice by content creators.
RayPublisher has is correct. Nothing to get excited about. If you are going to go through all the work to update something over 1,500 pages long you might as well get the copyright to retain the "look" of what you are producing.
Rub a Dub
One of the GB members inferred that in his part. That they needed a new font to copyright it.
Yes, but when he said that, he was just referring to the font itself -- that the old one was not copyrighted.
