Difference between Klingon and Tengwar

Rebecca Bettencourt beckiergb at gmail.com
Thu Sep 23 16:07:35 CDT 2021

On Thu, Sep 23, 2021 at 11:52 AM Shawn Steele via Unicode <
unicode at corp.unicode.org> wrote:

> IMO, perhaps it would be good to formally propose it again, and get a
> rejection that explicitly notes the primary concern is around the IP.

Has this not already happened? L2/20-169 (Recommendations to UTC #164 July
2020 on Script Proposals) addressed this on page 31:

Document: L2/20-181 Proposal to encode Klingon in Unicode -- Shoulson and


Comments: We reviewed this proposal for Klingon. [...] The minutes from UTC
#149 in November 2016 recorded an action (149-A103) “Respond to submitter
that it looks like there is sufficient usage to justify encoding Klingon as
a script. *UTC would need clear proof that Paramount would not pursue legal
action against the Unicode Consortium, or anyone who implements the script.*”
[emphasis mine]

The following comments were made during discussion:
• It was noted that there was a lawsuit involving Paramount that raised the
issue of Klingon and an amicus brief (on the Klingon script, see page 12).
The lawsuit was settled in 2017.
• We request the proposal author provide information on why trademark and
copyright are no longer an issue, pointing to the notice of non-approval. *A
disclaimer from Paramount stating they have no interest in IP rights to the
encoding of the proposal is needed.* [emphasis mine]
• Provide some background on the Klingon Language Institute, which has a
font for Klingon.
• Add the date to the proposal.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://corp.unicode.org/pipermail/unicode/attachments/20210923/b7be5928/attachment.htm>

More information about the Unicode mailing list