{"id":"IPA","title":"IPA Font License","reviewed_on":"2026-09-15","reviewer":"Giray Havur","text_source":"https://opensource.org/license/IPA","text_retrieved":true,"verdict":"created","summary":"The IPA Font License lets anyone install, use, embed and redistribute the font and build derived fonts from it, but a derived font must ship its own source, must offer recipients a way back to the original, must not carry the name of the original and must stay under this agreement. Documents that merely embed the font carry no obligation at all. Nothing here is legal advice.","findings":[{"rubric":2,"severity":"info","field":"odrl:target","description":"dalicc:CreativeWork and dcmitype:Software, the pair used for the OFL records. The licence defines a \"Digital Font Program\" as \"a computer program containing, or used to render or display fonts\", which is the software side, and Article 2 licenses its use in printed materials and digital content, which is the creative work side.","action":"applied"},{"rubric":3,"severity":"major","field":"odrl:permission","description":"Article 2 lets the Recipient install the Licensed Program on any number of computers, use it with or without modification in printed materials or digital content, \"conduct Reproduction and Other Exploitation of the printed materials and Digital Content ... for commercial or non-commercial purposes\", redistribute the program as is, and create, use, reproduce and redistribute a Derived Program. That is the permissive base set with cc:CommercialUse. dalicc:chargeDistributionFee is permitted because Article 3 allows a cost \"which does not exceed the total costs of postage, storage medium and handling fees\"; dalicc:chargeLicenseFee is not written, because no clause allows the font itself to be sold.","action":"applied"},{"rubric":4,"severity":"major","field":"odrl:prohibition","description":"dalicc:ChangeLicense, from Article 3.1(3): \"The Recipient must license the Derived Program under the terms and conditions of this Agreement.\" dalicc:promote, from Article 2: \"In no sense is this Agreement intended to transfer ... any right relating to any trademark, trade name, or service mark to the Recipient.\"","action":"applied"},{"rubric":5,"severity":"major","field":"odrl:duty","description":"Article 3.1 puts four duties on a redistributed Derived Program: a copy of the Derived Program and the files needed for further modification must travel with it (cc:SourceCode); recipients must be given the means to replace the Derived Program with the original, \"a difference file from the Original Program, or instructions setting out a method to replace\" it (dalicc:modificationNotice); \"No one may use or include the name of the Licensed Program as a program name, font name or file name of the Derived Program\" (dalicc:rename); and the Derived Program must be licensed under this Agreement (cc:ShareAlike). Article 3.2 puts cc:Notice on plain redistribution, \"The Recipient must attach a copy of this Agreement to the Licensed Program\". cc:Attribution is not written: no clause requires a copyright notice to be retained.","action":"applied"},{"rubric":6,"severity":"minor","field":"dalicc:additionalClauses","description":"Article 3.3 holds the warranty disclaimer and the limitation of liability in one paragraph; it is split at \"IN NO EVENT SHALL\" into the two fields. dalicc:additionalClauses carries Article 2's reservation of rights, the whole of Article 3.1 and 3.2, the no-support clause of 3.4, the term and termination of Article 4 and the governing law of Article 5.","action":"applied"},{"rubric":7,"severity":"info","field":"cc:jurisdiction","description":"Article 5.2 states: \"This Agreement shall be construed under the laws of Japan.\" Article 2 nonetheless grants \"a license to use the Licensed Program in any and all countries\", so the record keeps cc:jurisdiction dalicc:worldwide and quotes the choice of law; bpicounty:Japan is the alternative if the association reads a choice of law as a jurisdiction.","action":"applied"},{"rubric":8,"severity":"gap","field":"dalicc:additionalClauses","description":"Three gaps, all quoted. Article 3.2 forbids a plain redistributor to change the name of the Licensed Program or to modify it, a duty of verbatim redistribution with no term; proposed dalicc:verbatimRedistribution. Article 3.1(2) requires the means to go back to the original program; dalicc:modificationNotice is the closest term the library has and a term such as dalicc:originalVersionOffer would be more honest, the same gap the OGTSL record records. Article 4.2 terminates the agreement automatically on breach; proposed dalicc:terminatesOnBreach.","action":"none"},{"rubric":9,"severity":"info","field":"record","description":"The consistency check of app.services.composer with the axioms of dg_default returned an empty list for this record.","action":"none"},{"rubric":10,"severity":"info","field":"family","description":"Against the OFL records, the IPA licence is the stricter font licence: the rename duty is unconditional rather than tied to a declared reserved name, a derived font must ship the files needed to modify it further, and a way back to the original must be offered. Like the OFL it leaves documents made with the font untouched.","action":"none"}],"family":"Fonts and documentation","port_of":null,"variant_kind":null,"notes":"Modelled from the SPDX plain text of the IPA Font License and checked against the URL in cc:legalcode. Article 5 chooses Japanese law; the clause is quoted and cc:jurisdiction stays dalicc:worldwide, as everywhere in this review group."}