Re: Klingon tagging (was: RE: Seeming hostility to conlang scripts?)

--00000000000074f562065428117d
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

There's *gotta* be a limit to how badly copyright trolls (I use this term
because it seems clear to me that a script, being a purely-*functional*
device, falls outside the gamut of productions in the "literary,
scientific, and artistic domain" that're copyrightable under the Berne
Convention) can kneecap Unicode's ability to encode things, though, right?
Otherwise, any country in the world could decree that it provides an
infinite-length copyright term for both domestic and foreign works, and
thereby completely destroy Unicode's ability to encode any scripts not
already encoded.

On Sat, Jun 13, 2026, 1:45=E2=80=AFPM Piotr Karocki via Unicode <
[email protected]> wrote:

> > In any event, there is a difference between recognizing that something =
is
> > a script
> > from an ISO 15924 standpoint and determining that it meets Unicode
> > encoding standards.
>
> Ok, but if klingon is officially recognized as script, the only argument =
to
> not include it in Unicode can be based on "we cannot include copyrighted
> glyphs". Argument "it is not used" is invalidated.
>



- Vikki McDonough =F0=9F=8F=B3=EF=B8=8F=E2=80=8D=E2=9A=A7=EF=B8=8F

--00000000000074f562065428117d
Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"auto"><div dir=3D"auto"><div>There&#39;s *gotta* be a limit to =
how badly copyright trolls (I use this term because it seems clear to me th=
at a script, being a purely-*functional* device, falls outside the gamut of=
 productions in the &quot;literary, scientific, and artistic domain&quot; t=
hat&#39;re copyrightable under the Berne Convention) can kneecap Unicode&#3=
9;s ability to encode things, though, right?=C2=A0 Otherwise, any country i=
n the world could decree that it provides an infinite-length copyright term=
 for both domestic and foreign works, and thereby completely destroy Unicod=
e&#39;s ability to encode any scripts not already encoded.</div></div><br><=
div class=3D"gmail_quote"><div dir=3D"ltr" class=3D"gmail_attr">On Sat, Jun=
 13, 2026, 1:45=E2=80=AFPM Piotr Karocki via Unicode &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:=
[email protected]" target=3D"_blank" rel=3D"noreferrer">unicode@corp=
.unicode.org</a>&gt; wrote:<br></div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" styl=
e=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">&gt; In=
 any event, there is a difference between recognizing that something is<br>
&gt; a script<br>
&gt; from an ISO 15924 standpoint and determining that it meets Unicode<br>
&gt; encoding standards.<br>
<br>
Ok, but if klingon is officially recognized as script, the only argument to=
<br>
not include it in Unicode can be based on &quot;we cannot include copyright=
ed<br>
glyphs&quot;. Argument &quot;it is not used&quot; is invalidated.<br>
</blockquote></div>
<br><br><div data-smartmail=3D"gmail_signature"><div dir=3D"ltr"><div><br><=
/div>- Vikki McDonough =F0=9F=8F=B3=EF=B8=8F=E2=80=8D=E2=9A=A7=EF=B8=8F</di=
v></div></div>

--00000000000074f562065428117d--