Commercial use of fonts
There seems to be a lot of confusion about the commercial use of fonts when producing commercial material using software as part of the OS or within an app purchased from the App Store. In fact it has been an all day quest to nail down a legitimate ( & I do mean legally binding) answer.
I have trawled the net for the definitive answer but it all seems very elusive; as though no one company (other than a font foundry) wants to truly commit to a definitive, easy to grasp answer. (see below).
My scenario is the use of Affinity Designer (from the App store) to commercially produce material such as logos, letterheads, product information etc for client's for remuneration, using fonts which were supplied by the OS (or subsequent updates). The software is intended as personal and professional use.
One of the fonts in question is Arial.
The font book info on Arial states...
"License - You may use this font to display and print content as permitted by the license terms for the product in which this font is included. You may only ℹ embed this font in content as permitted by the embedding restrictions included in this font; and (ii) temporarily download this font to a printer or other output device to help print content.
Enabled Yes
Duplicate No
Copy protected No"
Firstly, can someone clarify the terms "Enabled" and "Duplicate" & "Copy protected" please? Iv'e been searching for the terms "Embedding restrictions" (Including the "Get Info" option on the font file) and cant pin point it anywhere.
It may be of interest to many, having contacted a well known font foundry with this enquiry, that I was told that I must have have a commercial license for fonts such as Arial for use on any material that is produced, including websites. And that simply because these fonts are packaged with a MAC OS (or even Windows), or their respective word processing/ graphic design software etc does not give the end user any commercial use rights whatsoever.
I therefore suspect that there are probably millions of people publishing illegally if this is the case.
My concern is that advice from a font owning company may not be entirely impartial.