X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: f996b,3483bd10835621f X-Google-Attributes: gidf996b,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-03-29 09:08:09 PST Path: supernews.google.com!sn-xit-03!supernews.com!newsswitch.lcs.mit.edu!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!colt.net!newspeer.highwayone.net!newspeer.clara.net!news.clara.net!server3.netnews.ja.net!news.ox.ac.uk!not-for-mail From: Henry Segerman Newsgroups: alt.ascii-art Subject: Re: Classic ascii pics Date: 29 Mar 2001 17:00:28 GMT Organization: Oxford University, England Lines: 46 Message-ID: <99vpnc$d3n$1@news.ox.ac.uk> References: <99l69i$ftc$1@news.ox.ac.uk> <985564211.24478@itz.pp.sci.fi> <99n6ki$3p0$1@news.ox.ac.uk> <99t2dj$chk$1@news.ox.ac.uk> <3AC2725B.52402EDB@thanks.com> <99v0oi$3bh$1@news.ox.ac.uk> NNTP-Posting-Host: sable.ox.ac.uk X-Trace: news.ox.ac.uk 985885228 13431 163.1.2.4 (29 Mar 2001 17:00:28 GMT) X-Complaints-To: newsmaster@ox.ac.uk NNTP-Posting-Date: 29 Mar 2001 17:00:28 GMT User-Agent: tin/pre-1.4-19990927 ("Nine While Nine") (UNIX) (OSF1/V4.0 (alpha)) Xref: supernews.google.com alt.ascii-art:5005 Andreas Freise wrote: : On 29 Mar 2001, Henry Segerman wrote: :> : Looks OK in IE, but not in NS. :> :> Aargh. I don't have NS here, what's wrong with it? And is it an issue with :> just that page or do other pages on the site also have problems? : In NS 4.76 (Linux) I need to set "overwrite document-specified fonts" to : get it in fixed width. Usually that means that the specified font is not : available on my computer/system and the replacement is then more or less : random. If I understand you right than you cannot change that yourself but : using no special font or at least a well distributet one (e.g. Courier) : could help. Yes, I have no control over the fonts at all. I thought it just defaults to the browser's fixed width font? :> There might be copyright issues apparently (The bbc is paranoid about stuff :> like that). I might need to get permission to use the art from each artist. :> I suspect that won't be a problem? The relevant artists are: : By the way: I don't think you are right about "Almost nobody minds use of : their art for almost any purpose...". I certainly do mind if it's a : commercial thing. You might add "non commercial" somewhere. Good point, I'll do that. Hmm. The exact wordings from the terms and conditions page on their site: "Where you are invited to submit any contribution to this site (including without limitation any text, graphics, video or audio) you are required by such submission to grant the BBC a perpetual, royalty-free, non-exclusive, sublicenseable right and license to use, reproduce, modify, adapt, publish, translate, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, play, and exercise all copyright and publicity rights with respect to any such work worldwide and/or to incorporate it in other works in any media no w known or later developed for the full term of any rights that may exist in such content, consistent with privacy restrictions set forth in the BBC's Privacy Policy." Well, to the exact wording, that means that they theoretically could use the art in a commercial manner. If that bothers you (or anyone else) I'll take the page down. Realistically I can't see them doing anything with it (perhaps including the entry, with art in a published CD or something at most). -- ,-. Henry Segerman |/ |,--. /\ | /| /"\/"\ | /| | |/ /| / |/ /| | |/ | \_/\_/ |/ | \/ `--'| /| uewJa6aS hJuaH `-'