The GP's linked article[0] doesn't say anything about fonts. It says that the MTA sued someone for using the letter 'N' in a circle on a T-shirt. Not even the same color scheme.

Judging from the examples on one of the MTA's branding pages[1], there doesn't seem to be anything particularly unique about the font they're using. They don't even mention it by name. Other sources claim the official signage is a mix of Helvetica and Akzidenz Grotesk. In any case, fontface designs are not copyrightable in the US. Fonts can be (as programs/data) but that isn't really relevant here.

[0] http://www.fordhamiplj.org/2010/01/07/mta-symbols-intellectu...

[1] http://web.mta.info/developers/resources/line_colors.htm

Someone paying a lot of money for something doesn't appear to be a good argument for establishing a property interest for the people who paid such funds. I'm unclear what interest society has in protecting fonts. It seems like people will pay for the creation of more fonts than society can ever consume without the benefit of any such protection meaning society has no interest in extending any property interest despite any artistic merit or worth of such efforts.

At least movies cost millions of dollars and presumably we as a society will get more books if authors don't also have to make french fries. What protection do fonts need?

Books? What do we need books for? We've written more books than any person could consume.

The vast bulk of authors don't make much of anything off of their books. Obviously, copyright protection only marginally increases the number of books written. The same goes for music.

For the last few United or Delta flights I took, I had seen their ads that said they do this and that “contact less” - pretty standard in the covid world.

Right under the ad was a gigantic message that said “contact-less trademark owned by and used with permission of EMVCo, LLC”

I can imagine the airline’s surprise if they have originally printed ads without this.

I've never understood all the hoopla about fonts, or why anyone would pay money for one. Heck, I made my own font when I blew a ROM for the character generator for a terminal I made. It never occurred to me it was copyrightable.

I've read several articles bloviating about this or that font, describing it like a wine taster would write about a wine, and would just come away rolling my eyes.

You'll appreciate a good font after having to read text printed in a bad one.

Good fonts should be a dime a dozen.

They’re actually incredibly labor-intensive to create!

How so? And people have been creating fonts for 500 years. What's the need to create more? It's just a font.

> How so?

You need to draw every letter in uppercase and lowercase, and every number and symbol. You need to make sure each character is visually consistent with and works well alongside every other character.

Then you need to repeat the above for every weight your font supports. (Bold, semibold, light, heavy, etc.)

Then you need to repeat all of the above for italics.

Then you need to kern the font. This means determining how much space to leave between every possible combination of two characters in your font.

---

> And people have been creating fonts for 500 years. What's the need to create more?

That's a bit like saying "People have been writing books for 500 years. What's the need to create more?"

We've only been displaying fonts on LCD screens for ~30 years, and fonts that were designed for print don't look as good on screen (and vise versa). Even fonts that were designed for low-res LCD screens often don't look as good on newer high-resolution ones.

Branding. When a company puts their name on an advertisement/product/building they want it to be instantly recognizable and they want to convey a specific image that's more than just the written word.

That's a trademark, not a font or a copyright. Trademark IP law is distinct.