Kannada, Kannadiga, Kannadigaru, Karnataka,

Kannadigarella ondaagi Kannadavannu ulisona, kalisona and belesona

VASU’s email 2004 to AKRUTHI Owner and What VASU is quoting afterwards is WRONG and read What Dr. U. B. Pavanaja says about VASU.

VASU’s email 2004 to AKRUTHI Owner and What VASU is quoting afterwards is WRONG and What Dr. U. B. Pavanaja says about VASU.

VASU email to Anand of Akruthi

—————–
Forwarded Message:

Subj:

Fw: From Sheshadrivasu Chandrasekharan

Date:

6/28/2004 11:01:59 AM Pacific Daylight Time

From:

anand@cyberscapeindia.com

To:

novamed@aol.com

Sent from the Internet (Details)

Shri Kumarswamy,

Namaskaara,

I think largely due to your relentless efforts to ferret out the truth behind the sad state of affairs in the area of Kannada software and the domination of false icons of the so called free software like KGP Nudi and Sheshadrivasu’s Baraha, a lot of bitter truth and hidden information is coming out from various quarters, which is exposing the nasty skullduggery by which these false icons have sucked on the blood of the real workers in the Kannada software arena who have never claimed that they and they alone have done a great service to Kannada, but have been contributing silently in the background.

I am forwarding here, an admission by one such icon, the Guru of free Kannada software, who, perhaps due to the fear of getting exposed by these revelations, very belatedly realised the need for acknowledging the unabashed piracy. More than six years after his misdeed, he meekly apologises for having pirated our “Akruti” fonts. This is a charge we have also made on KGP. How many more years, do we have to wait for them to come clean?

Anyway, I hope you keep churning the murky waters of the Kannada software world for more such nuggets. I sincerely hope at the end of this great “Samudra Manthan“, finally some true gems emerge and adorn our beloved “Kannada Maate” who must be hanging her head in eternal shame at the present state of affairs. All the behind the scene workers like us should be thankful for your fearless crusade against all the wrong doers.

Hoping for a positive outcome for the sake of Kannada,

Anand S.K.

Managing Director

Cyberscape Multimedia Ltd.

—– Original Message —–

From: Sheshadrivasu Chandrasekharan < baraha@hotmail.com>

To: < anand@cyberscapeindia.com>

Sent: Tuesday, June 22, 2004 10:18 PM

Subject: From Sheshadrivasu Chandrasekharan

Ø Dear Mr. S.K. Anand,
>
> I recently saw a remark from you in one of the postings in an Internet
> newsgroup which goes as follows…
>
> “We who have been developing such fonts (AKRUTI) well over two decades would
> not like a repeat of the experience, we had when our fonts were pirated off
> the Web and used without acknowledgement, first by an individual who went on
> to release a free software…”
>
> I thought you may be referring to Baraha software in the above remark, and
> hence is this email.
>
> When I started developing a Kannada software, I had no knowledge of fonts at
> all.
I experimented a lot with various Kannada fonts available in the
> Internet, including Akruti. This research helped me to understand the
> technology behind the Kannada fonts and I learnt a lot from these software.
> Initially, I wanted Baraha compatible with other Kannada fonts. But due to
> various limitations of such fonts, I had to come up with my own encoding. I
> honestly admit that I have used the glyphs from one of the Akruti fonts in
> Baraha 1.0, and I was not very serious to mention about it. When I released
> Baraha 1.0, I didn’t know it will become popular and used by many people. It
> was only an experiment which I wanted to share with my family and friends.

> But later, when Baraha became popular, for copyright reasons, I had to add
> my own fonts for Kannada and other languages. I have created many new font
> styles, which don’t exist in any other Kannada software. My intention was to
> provide the facility for basic documentation needs of Kannada. It was not my
> intention to copy or re-create various Kannada font styles that are
> available in other packages. Instead I have focussed more on portability of
> Kannada text from Baraha to other software such as Akruti, ShreeLipi, e.t.c.
>
> Through this mail I would like to express my grattitude to various other
> Kannada software for helping me to acquire the knowledge. My acknowldgements
> to Akruti software for providing the glyphs which were used in the intial
> releases of Baraha.
I apologise for this delayed acknowledgement.
>
> Regards
> Vasu
> ***********************************************************
> Free Kannada/Devanagari software – http://www.baraha.com

***********************************************************
_______________________________________________________________________

VASU sends the following email to kannadigas all over the world.

WHY ? Because VASU got Caught for STEALING the IPR.

This following information is also FALSE according to some sources.

___________________________

Dear friends,

Recently I have read some forwarded emails mentioning that Baraha has used fonts copied from other software. This statement is not true and I would like to clarify the same in this mail. As of Baraha 6.0 (to be released shortly), the following fonts are available for use.

BRH Amerikannada

BRH Bengaluru

BRH Kailasam

BRH Kannada

BRH Kasturi

BRH Sirigannada

BRH Vijay

BRH Devanagari

BRH Tamil

BRH Telugu

BRH Malayalam

All the above fonts are designed and hand-written on the paper by the artist Sri. Lingadevaru and digitized (conversion to TrueType Fonts) by me. “Except for “BRH Kannada” all the other Kannada fonts are totally new styles which don’t exist in any other Kannada software“. Most of the Kannada font styles that we see on computers today existed and used in the books, magazines and news papers much earlier. The “BRH Kannada” style follows one such classic type face that was used much before the computers came into existence as shown in the following examples.

Gnana Gangotri – 1971

Amara Chitra Katha – 1978

The above style is a kind of de-facto standard for Kannada, which is used by almost all the publications today. Every Kannada font vendor has created this style using re-digitization (re-digitization is the process of creating a digital font based on an existing font either by scanning a printed letter or extracting from an existing font) and has given his own name. The following are some of the fonts, which have this style. There are many other generic type face styles for Kannada, which can be found in all the software packages.

BRH Kannada – Baraha

Nudi Akshara 09 – Nudi

AkrutiKndPadmini – Akruti

Shree-Kan-0850 – ShreeLipi

SHREE_DECCAN – Prajavani

KPNEWS – Kannada Prabha

Kan Badami – PhonScript Systems

so on…

All these fonts use the style shown in the above examples. We may find a few minor differences, when we compare these fonts. In most cases, this difference is introduced automatically during the digitization process. Some vendors deliberately introduce a few changes to certain glyphs, to be able differentiate from others. Some times, a different character or line spacing is used so that the font looks different when displayed on the screen or printed. Some times, the font size, thickness is modified to give a different look. Whatever may be the difference, they all derive from a common design, which cannot belong to any one individual or company.

The common font styles that existed much before the computers cannot be copyright protected by any one person or company. This is the rule followed for English fonts. The English fonts such as “Arial”, “Times New Roman”, e.t.c belong to this generic category. Here only the brand names such as “Arial” is copyright protected and that name can’t be used for other styles. But the actual character styles (or outlines) in the Arial font may be copied and re-produced by anybody. Font copyright laws vary from one country to another. In Germany for example, only the new font styles that are created after 1981 can be copyright protected by filing a special registered design with the patent offices. I am not aware if any such laws exist for fonts in India.

USA courts have long back decided that fonts can’t be copyrighted AT ALL! Here, the digital outline can never be protected. According to them there can’t be any original font style, because, every font is created by slightly modifying some other font, and there aren’t really “new” font designs! See the following excerpts from the law…

“The Copyright Office has decided that digitized representations of typeface designs are not registerable under the Copyright Act because they do not constitute original works of authorship. The digitized representations of typefaces are neither original computer programs (as defined in 17 U.S.C. 101), nor original databases, nor any other original work of authorship.”

So, in a font, the name, any programming code not describing the font design are all that can be copyrighted. This leaves the door open in the USA to have anyone pay for the output of each character from a typesetter and re-digitize it or extract the design from a font program (and rename it), easily duplicating the design. Most foundries have very similar fonts derived from work largely designed by others. More information about font/copyright can be found at http://ssifonts.com/Myths.htm

When I started developing Kannada software in 1998, I had no knowledge of fonts at all. I had to do a lot of research and analysis on various Kannada fonts freely available in the Internet, which helped me to understand the current technology and the various issues. I am sure the other software vendors created their software only after doing such a research. This is not against any law.


Some Kannada software vendors complained that Baraha has hurt their business because of its free nature. I still believe that the only way Kannada can compete with English is by a user-friendly, quality, free software. If not me, some other individual would have done the same work later. It is unfortunate that no Kannada software vendor utilized this great opportunity. The initial version of Baraha was just an experiment (not so serious…), which I wanted to share with my family and friends. I didn’t know it would become so popular and used by many people. When Baraha gained popularity, I introduced new Kannada fonts in the versions that followed, as mentioned above. I could have easily re-produced the common font styles that existed in other software and competed with them. Instead, I came up with only new styles, which didn’t exist before. My intention is only to provide a free facility for the basic documentation needs of Kannada. I have focused more on standardization issues and portability of data to various formats and Operating Systems, which was ignored (deliberately for business interests?) by other software vendors. Since I don’t have any business interest regarding Baraha, the only motivation for me is quality, usability, portability and the interest in Kannada. Through Baraha, I have made a lot of friends throughout the world, which are more valuable for me than the financial benefits.

Baraha is not a rocket technology! I have simply put together many things that existed already. While doing so, I haven’t violated any copyright laws concerning font software.

Many software vendors and individuals have created Kannada software either out of business interests or personal interest in Kannada culture. Whatever may be the reason, my personal thanks to all of them because they formed the foundation for Kannada in IT. They kept Kannada alive so that it can be rejuvenated today. The credit goes to software companies such as C-DAC, ShreeLipi, Akruti, KGP and many others. KGP did a good work by standardizing Kannada fonts and the keyboard. Some individuals such as Sri. Kasturi Rangachar and Sri. Vishweshwara Dixit here in USA, had attempted to create Kannada software much before the introduction of Baraha. The list goes on… Without the efforts of above companies and Individuals, Kannada on computers would not have grown to the extent it is today.

-Vasu

______________________________

_____________________________________

Dr. U. B. Pavanaja’s comments on VASU’s ABOVE assertions:

 Vasu’s justification and the realities

With this background let me discuss a bit of what Vasu has written in a document and widely circulated in mailing lists. This document is also present in his Baraha discussion group (groups.msn.com/baraha). Let me quote from this document-

—————– Begin ———————————

USA courts have long back decided that fonts can’t be copyrighted AT ALL! Here, the digital outline can never be protected. According to them there can’t be any original font style, because, every font is created by slightly modifying some other font, and there aren’t really “new” font designs! See the following excerpts from the law…

“The Copyright Office has decided that digitized representations of typeface designs are not registerable under the Copyright Act because they do not constitute original works of authorship. The digitized representations of typefaces are neither original computer programs (as defined in 17 U.S.C. 101), nor original databases, nor any other original work of authorship.”

So, in a font, the name, any programming code not describing the font design are all that can be copyrighted. This leaves the door open in the USA to have anyone pay for the output of each character from a typesetter and re-digitize it or extract the design from a font program (and rename it), easily duplicating the design. Most foundries have very similar fonts derived from work largely designed by others. More information about font/copyright can be found at http://ssifonts.com/Myths.htm

———————- End —————————-

Vasu is very cleverly and conveniently quoting from a web-site put up in the year 1997 and has not been updated afterwards.

There is a reason for this site not being updated afterwards. This refers to the classic legal battle between Adobe and SSI. Southern Software Inc. (SSI) used to copy and rename fonts from Adobe and others. They thought they were safe from prosecution because, though they had directly copied the points that define the shapes from Adobe’s fonts, they had moved all the points just slightly so they were not technically identical. Nevertheless, in his 1998 judgment, the judge determined that the computer code had been copied:

The evidence presented shows that there is some creativity in designing the font software programs. While the glyph dictates to a certain extent what points the editor must choose, it does not dictate every point that must be chosen. Adobe has shown that font editors make creative choices as to what points to select based on the image in front of them on the computer screen. The code is determined directly from the selection of the points. Thus, any copying of the points is copying of literal expression, that is, in essence, copying of the computer code itself.

SSI lost the legal battle at the courts. Judgment was in favor of Adobe. Hence SSI did not update their web-site.

Vasu is conveniently quoting from this web-site. One can read in detail about this case in the following web-sites:-

http://scripts.sil.org/cms/scripts/page.ph…UNESCO_Font_Lic

http://directory.serifmagazine.com/Ethics_…/judgement.php4

http://www.ipcounselors.com/19980309.htm

When we conducted a opentype font workshop at Bangalore during March 2003, there was a talk on IPR issues related to fonts by Lawrence Liang, who is an expert on cyber laws. He had discussed this Adobe vs SSI case.

_______________________________________________________


November 6, 2007 - Posted by | Baraha, Sheshadri Vasu

No comments yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: