[citation][nom]noveloa[/nom]Font's should not be able to be copyrighted period, it is completely ridiculous. Hundreds of fonts look exactly the same, especially in this case where I can easily find more than one font on microsoft word that looks like that.[/citation]
Hundreds of fantasy novels read exactly the same, yet you can still copyright your Tolkien rip-off. The fact is that making a good font is hard work and takes creativity, plus there's a market for it. People will pay to use your font if it's what they're looking for. It has been this way ever since type was carved out of wooden blocks. I don't see why a font can't be copyrighted like a book or a painting, since it's still a creative art and at least it's marketable.
[citation][nom]AMDnoob[/nom]wouldnt patenting a typeface be like patenting a form of painting? Like maybe a painter wanted to patent the way he used brush strokes or dots to create a painting. Cause artists develop techniques that clearly can be spotted in all their works. So my point is, patenting that way you draw a "g" or an "a", isn't that a little silly???[/citation]
You don't patent fonts, you copyright them. Patenting is something else altogether: you could patent a method for putting printed words on the page like with a new kind of printing press, or you could patent a way to make blocks of type, but you can't patent the characters on the blocks. And artists sometimes do copyright the way they draw letters, as most letterers in graphic arts and comics create at least one font for their own lettering.