Let's all just take a moment to remember that the design of fonts (in the US) is NOT copyrightable. The only reason vector fonts are copyrightable at all is a raging dumpster-fire called Adobe v Southern. [1] [2]
The case itself says this: "defendants contend that the numerical reference points that define an outline of a glyph are unprotectable as a matter of law" but then "the court finds that the Adobe font software programs are protectable original works of authorship."
Note: when they say "font software programs" here, they simply mean a vector (say, ttf) font file rather than a bitmap (say, bdf or pcf) font file.
David 'Novalis' Turner probably put it best when he wrote this: "A font face -- that is, the look of a font, is not copyrightable... But font 'programs' (truetype fonts, for example) are. Another ruling has extended the definition of 'programs' to include certain outline data. Why this outline data is not equivalent to a font face, nobody knows." [3]
The case itself says this: "defendants contend that the numerical reference points that define an outline of a glyph are unprotectable as a matter of law" but then "the court finds that the Adobe font software programs are protectable original works of authorship."
Note: when they say "font software programs" here, they simply mean a vector (say, ttf) font file rather than a bitmap (say, bdf or pcf) font file.
David 'Novalis' Turner probably put it best when he wrote this: "A font face -- that is, the look of a font, is not copyrightable... But font 'programs' (truetype fonts, for example) are. Another ruling has extended the definition of 'programs' to include certain outline data. Why this outline data is not equivalent to a font face, nobody knows." [3]
[1] https://web.archive.org/web/20100522133154/http://lw.bna.com...
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adobe_Systems,_Inc._v._Souther....
[3] https://www.fsf.org/blogs/licensing/20050425novalis