Post #1351220

2026-03-18 20:40 UTC

@xotypeco I first ran across these kinds of reactions in the context of photography and illustration licensing (which is, of course, the model from which font licensing derives). People who had never licensed artwork before had trouble understanding why they had to pay more for additional uses or additional types of use. They’d paid to use a photograph in a magazine ad with a specific circulation: why did they have to pay again to use the same photograph in a brochure or on their new website?

Replies (1)

@TiroTypeworks@typo.social 2026-03-18 20:44

@xotypeco Yes, this is a communication or customer education issue, but it comes from thinking about cost instead of thinking about value. The usage rights licensing model for creative work derives fees based on the (potential or realised) value to the customer. If a customer is thinking in terms of having paid for a *thing* (e.g. the font they download), they’re not thinking about paying for different ways of using that thing and the multiplcation of value they derive from those uses. Usage rights licensing is specifically a response to ease of reproduction: the more easily reproduced something is — and copying a digital file is about as easy as it can get — the less material or inherent value the thing itself has. But the *use* of the thing may have huge value.

Open ##1351221