Code2003 is a rip-off

Richard Wordingham richard.wordingham at
Sat Aug 15 06:33:29 CDT 2020

On Fri, 14 Aug 2020 23:23:30 +0000
James Kass via Unicode <unicode at> wrote:

> There's a font called Code2003 which is available for download on 
> various web sites.  Most of its glyphs were stolen from my fonts 
> Code2000 and Code2001.  Several ranges included in the font which
> were not covered by my fonts were likely stolen from elsewhere.  For
> example, for the range "Miscellaneous Symbols and Pictographs", its
> "developer" simply stole the glyphs from the Unicode chart for that
> range as found on the Unicode web site.  (Although some of those
> glyphs were modified by mirroring or slight rotation.  Please see
> attached graphic.)

Have you read the legal defence at ?
I think the editor's arguments are wrong, but I think 'rip-off' is too
strong a word.

He may have made what would be legal use of other fonts if they were
themselves legal.

> The extended font information contained within Code2003 lists me as
> its developer and contains broken links to my old web site and e-mail 
> address.  I am not affiliated with "St. Gigafont", I do not steal
> glyphs from the Unicode web site charts, and Code2003 is being
> distributed without my permission or authorization.

The allocation of plaudits and brickbats is a tricky task.  Where do we
stand on getting Code2000 licenses?  Have you made representations to
St. Gigafont about his implicit accusation of copying?

Artistically, you could be aggrieved by the removal of shaping -
Devanagari shaping is completely gone.

> Some download web sites request donations.  Any donations are going
> to "St. Gigafont", not to me.

I hope that at least they are being channelled to St. Gigafont.  I
found a copy of the font that said, in its name table, both that it
was licensed under the SIL Open Font Licence, and that it was
shareware, to be licensed from you for US$5.  Does my licence from you
cover me for Code2003 so far as your rights are concerned? 

Have you managed to contact "St. Gigafont"?  It's conceivable that some
of the donations have been set aside for you.  It would seem that "St.
Gigafont" has been hosting Code2000 and Code2001. You might even
recover an income trickle.

> This e-mail is a "heads-up" both to other font developers whose work
> may have been stolen and to The Unicode Consortium itself because the
> PDF charts are copyrighted and may use copyrighted fonts.

I once found that one of my fonts released under the SIL Open font
Licence was being redistributed under the same name but with
modifications and no hint of them in the name table.  I have wondered
whether that constituted a donation of the changes to me.

Bringing the matter more clearly into the scope of this list, is the
original goal of Code2000 still achievable?  Is it achievable without
horrendous artistic compromises?  I was recently horrified by how many
ligatures are needed just to write Pali in the Sinhala script, let
alone Sanskrit.


More information about the Unicode mailing list