RM Cheese Fontdue

by p2pnut
Cloned from Opening by p2pnut.

Download disabled

The designer of this FontStruction has chosen not to make it available for download from this website by choosing an “All Rights Reserved" license.

Please respect their decision and desist from requesting license changes in the comments.

If you would like to use the FontStruction for a specific project, you may be able to contact the designer directly about obtaining a license.

Inspired by Mrs p2pnut :) and no ... we don't have fondue parties
Info: Created on 21st August 2009 . Last edited on 27th October 2009.
License Creative Commons
Fave Tags:
  • -


:D and I thought Shasta was the one with Tschernobyl mutations.
Comment by cayo 25th August 2009
love the name! love the font! :)
Comment by jenjes232 25th August 2009
Quel fromage! It looks very much like real cheese melted. I like the holes in them. Brilliant! 10/10
Comment by Frodo7 25th August 2009
Congratulations! FontStruct Staff have deemed your FontStruction worthy of special mention. “Cheese Fontdue” is now a Top Pick.
Comment by gferreira_admin 27th August 2009
makes my mouth water :)~ you have a great talent for envisioning. and you also make each glyph unique within the pattern you create. love the name. mrs p2pnut is a great resource :)
Comment by funk_king 27th August 2009
Cool idea, great execution! And this is coming from a Swiss guy who really knows what cheese and fondue are about... :)
@cayo: Dude, this is only cheese... not some kind of nuclear meltdown! ;)
Comment by Tobias Sommer (shasta) 3rd September 2009
Negative U/C characters placed in l/c ... also a 'rogue' brick to the right of the 9 has been removed.
Comment by p2pnut 27th October 2009
Hi, Ray!

I just noticed Cheese Fontdue at www.abstractfonts.com under your actual name. Your initials, however, are not contained in the font's title. You're probably aware of this already, but if not, I thought I ought to point you there.


Comment by fontcollector 28th November 2009
Thanks for your vigilance Dan ... at least it is under my name unlike the one that has been stolen from kix.

Is it normal for sites to anonymously take fonts from sites such as FS? I think it would be so much more polite to at least mention that they are doing so.

As to them renaming it without the RM - I may mention it to them, but in reality I add the prefix RM so that I can more easily find my own fonts when I install them.
Comment by p2pnut 28th November 2009
I don't know what's considered normal when it comes to offering someone's font without the consent or knowledge of the designer. There seems to be a gap between legality and decent manners.

Recently, some of us were thrilled to learn that our work was being showcased at instantshift.com. I admit, however, that my feelings were mixed at first. I agree with you that it would have been lovely to have been asked, or at least notified in advance. In this case, downloading is accomplished from each font's homepage on FontStruct.

The situation at abstractfonts.com is rather different. Even so, if you want them to add your prefix, I encourage you to contact them. I sent such a request when I noticed that instantShift had added some extraneous spaces within my font's name, and they fixed the errors in a single day.

Not long ago, I uploaded a font to dafont.com, and the same mistake occurred. They handled my request the next day as well. So don't be shy, Ray. As you stated, at least this font is being presented as yours, rather than the property of some lowlife.
Comment by fontcollector 28th November 2009
Following on from Dan's discovery I have been doing a bit of Googling and have found some of my designs (including Cheese Fontdue) on the following:


All the fonts featured are ones that I have uploaded to 1001 Fonts. At least these are sites offering fonts for free.

More disturbing was the discovery that my work has been included on the '4000 Fonts' CD which retails at $34.99 at http://www.typeset-store.co.cc/fonts/free-fonts.htm

They claim that 'Brand new fonts created by SummitType font foundry a division of Summitsoft.Summitsoft has established it s very own font foundry to bring all new and never before seen fonts to retail.' and 'All of the fonts in 4000 Fonts are new from our SummitType foundry and have never been available before now.'

I tried to contact Summitsoft, but the contact option on their site does not work!

It would be interesting if other FS members try searching on Google under their own name - to see how many of our designs Summitsoft are claiming as their own.
Comment by p2pnut 30th November 2009
RM, not sure how you determined your fonts were being used by Summitsoft. did you see them listed or appear as a sample? this is quite disturbing. of course they could have 'redrawn' to avoid the copyright issue i suppose. but with today's technology, it's so easy to steal someone's work. a shame that we are being used by others for their gain and have no recourse to address this issue. a shame.
Comment by funk_king 30th November 2009
@funk_king: I just put "my name + fonts" into Google.
Comment by p2pnut 30th November 2009
How do you know that your font is included on the '4000 Fonts' CD? There are very limited samples provided, and no TOC.

I did a Google search with my name (again), and found Edoras Stencil listed on 2 of those 3 websites. Moreover, I found Hommage a Escher font used in a logo design contest, with proper credit give to me (http://oe.cowgar.com/forum/109977.wc#110104 at number 110.) What do you think about that?
Comment by Frodo7 30th November 2009
@funk_king: What do you mean by 'redrawn' to avoid the copyright issue? It doesn't really matter whether they use pen, paintbrush, chisel, punchcutter, computer, or any other mean, it is still an infringement of copyright. They can not redraw or modify your artwork without your permission.
Comment by Frodo7 30th November 2009
@Frodo7: Great that someone was promoting Hommage a Escher (and giving due credit).

Below is the result of my Google search - the link takes you straight to the 4000 Fonts CD sales site.
Comment by p2pnut 1st December 2009
Actually, frodo7, a font copyright only applies to the unique set of points, lines and curves, i.e. the mathematical formula used to create the outlines. It does not apply to the design of the typeface. Yes, that's right, the design of the type is non-coyprightable. Anyone can scan, print or, in some other way, grab an existing typeface design and if they redraw the shapes, they can rightfully (under current copyright laws) claim that new font as their own. Ethically it may be wrong, but it is completely legal. At least that's my understanding of the issue.
Comment by thalamic 1st December 2009
@p2pnut: I have a good news for you. The "4000 Fonts" CD by Summitsoft went on sale on Amazon.com on August 21, 2009. (Co)incidentally, it is the very day you have created RM Cheese Fontdue. Thus, it seems very unlikely that your font made it to that CD, unless they've employed some time machine trick.
Comment by Frodo7 1st December 2009
It is really sad that some ill intended people take advantages of copyright limitations to redistribute our beloved FontStructions in order to make an easy buck. I have been away from FS for a while, first on behalf of too much work and lately due to family issues, and now that I can finally spend some time in my favorite playground I find out about such an abuse of our beloved "children". I don´t mind the redistribution itself as long proper credit is given, but this is really something worth fighting for.

On a much brighter side I tried to google my name + font as P2pnut did and I came to this nice recopilation of FontStructors which lightened up my day a little bit:
Comment by cayo 1st December 2009
@thalamic: I fondly disagree with your views on this issue. Fonts are visual/pictorial artworks. There is no such provision for fonts in copyright to protect only "the unique set of points, lines and curves, i.e. the mathematical formula used to create the outlines". Copyright protects the whole artwork as long as it exist in any tangible form, in this case printed or digitally stored on a medium.

For a short while I used to work as an editor for a small publisher (a subsidiary company of Vivendi Universal), and I have studied copyright issues, we had to deal with on a daily basis. Just one example: For a new book we wanted to "borrow" some illustrations from another book of a different publisher. To borrow means in that case to completely redraw the graphics by our own hired graphic artist in his/hes slightly different style. We asked for permission, we gave proper credit to the originals' author, but it still wasn't good enough. The other publisher asked for astronomical license fees. Lawsuits were threatened, deadlines were missed as the haggle went on. At the end we had to reduce the number of "borrowed" illustrations to a minimum to stay within the budget.

It is also very illustrative to the current state of intellectual property, and copyright law (guarded largely by the music and motion picture industry) the case of the song entitled: 100 Miles and Runnin' by N.W.A. See the documentary here: GOOD COPY BAD COPY (2007)

Disclaimer: I'm not a legal expert. These issues are often very complicated. I hope there are smarter people around here on FS, to voice their opinion on copyright matters.
Comment by Frodo7 2nd December 2009
There are many official and unofficial sites to explain copyright issues. Here are some exerpts from http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ1.pdf

What Is Copyright?

Copyright is a form of protection provided by the laws of the United States (title 17, U. S. Code) to the authors of “original works of authorship,” including literary, dramatic, musical, artistic, and certain other intellectual works. This protection is available to both published and unpublished works. Section 106 of the 1976 Copyright Act generally gives the owner of copyright the exclusive right to do and to authorize others to do the following:

• To reproduce the work in copies or phonorecords;

• To prepare derivative works based upon the work;

• To distribute copies or phonorecords of the work to the public by sale or
other transfer of ownership, or by rental, lease, or lending;

• To display the work publicly, in the case of literary, musical, dramatic, and
choreographic works, pantomimes, and pictorial, graphic, or sculptural
works, including the individual images of a motion picture or other audiovisual

In addition, certain authors of works of visual art have the rights of attribution and integrity as described in section 106A of the 1976 Copyright Act. For further information, see Circular 40, Copyright Registration for Works of the Visual Arts. It is illegal for anyone to violate any of the rights provided by the copyright law to the owner of copyright. These rights, however, are not unlimited in
scope. Sections 107 through 121 of the 1976 Copyright Act establish limitations
on these rights. In some cases, these limitations are specified exemptions from copyright liability. One major limitation is the doctrine of “fair use,” which is given a statutory basis in section 107 of the 1976 Copyright Act. In other instances, the limitation takes the form of a “compulsory license” under which certain limited uses of copyrighted works are permitted upon payment of specified royalties and compliance with statutory conditions.
Comment by Frodo7 2nd December 2009
As I understand it, Thalamic is correct about US Copyright Law's treatment of fonts. Basically in the US, you can't copyright the design of letters.

However, in the 1990's, Adobe was tired of having their fonts ripped off and sued a distributor of cheap font CDs. The vendor was essentially opening an Adobe font, using software to modify the paths slightly and then renaming it something similar. (I remember Optima became Optimum...)

Adobe won the case by arguing that the fonts were software, and that the code that defined the font was being illegally redistributed per the terms of the license agreement. (Google "Adobe vs. Southern Systems" for details.) They also won some protections for the names of their fonts.

But Thalamic is completely correct when he says - in the US - someone can look at your font and redraw it and be "legal." Recently, there has been discussion about using design patents to protect font designs...

(Note: This all relates to US Law. I'm not sure what protections are available in other countries.)
Comment by Sketchbook B 2nd December 2009
Sorry for the triple post. Hit the back button and it reposted... Is there any way to delete duplicate posts? If there is, I can't find it.

More info is also at http://www.typeright.org.
Comment by Sketchbook B 2nd December 2009
@Sketchbook B: It is very exciting to learn more and more about this contentious topic. I have to correct myself: Thalamic may be right, concerning fonts created on US soil. There is no copyright protection for fonts in the USA. But most of the developed world, including Europe and Commonwealth countries do recognise moral and economic rights of design and artworks, including typefaces.

This is what TypeRight.org says (exerpts):

"There are legal foundations to why there should be font copyright — in fact, cases from other fields, and the United States' obligations under international conventions, demand that copyright registration be allowed for type fonts. Most courts in the U.S. will not find any difficulty with these arguments.

1. The US Copyright Office still officially refuses to accord protection for typeface designs. This is due to a misunderstanding of the field, which has resulted in the United States being the only country in the western world not to recognize the intellectual property in typeface designs.

2. Copyright once did protect typefaces (see 1911 Act) but the 1976 Copyright Revision Act changed that.

5. The lack of protection for fonts is anomalous — a photograph or a drawing have the same creative effort as a typeface, and are accorded protection under the act.

Berne Convention

11. It is evident that the United States copyright position is anomalous with the position in other parts of the developed world. The United States has held herself out as a leader in intellectual property when it comes to software, yet neglects typeface design. However, similar creative issues apply.

12. The United States' obligations under the Berne Convention, now that she is a signatory, is to respect the copyright on fonts, if such copyright exists in the countries they were designed in. Fonts designed outside the United States become subject to protection as artistic works. There is little reason for domestically designed fonts to receive a different treatment (nor should they — GATT Articles 1 and 3). "

To the last point: Yes, there is such copyright in my country, therefore the USA, as a signatory of the Berne Convention is to respect that.
Comment by Frodo7 2nd December 2009
Thanks for correcting me Frodo. I am glad I was wrong. :-)
Comment by thalamic 2nd December 2009
(repeated posts by Sketchbook_B deleted)
Comment by gferreira_admin 2nd December 2009
One thing to note is that FontStructions are distributed under CreativeCommons licenses, which extend the terms of standard copyright. More information on Wikipedia and on the CreativeCommons website.

Another thing to note is that, while it's good to study and discuss copyright & licenses, they really belong to the domain of lawyers. None of us non-lawyers can make authoritative statements or give legal advice on the matter.
Comment by gferreira_admin 2nd December 2009
As a sidenote, I encourage FontStructors to create their own blogs to showcase their work to the world outside FontStruct. We have some good examples: Sketchbook_B, Youssef's Type60, TypeRider's Spinsels etc. Behance (like afrojet ) or Flickr are also good alternatives. By publishing his/her own work the creator makes his authorship clear and public, and gets the first results on Google for it.
Comment by gferreira_admin 2nd December 2009
Wow!! It's amazing the conversations that buzz over a bit of cheese :)

I wasn't miffed by the use of my font - it's out there in the public domain already - more that someone was charging money for something that I give for free. (that makes it sound a bit like the distinction between a 'slapper' and a 'hooker').

@gferreira : thanks for the note of caution and the good advice.

@cayo: welcome back to the fold. Yes, Luc Devroye certainly is one of the good guys.

@Frodo7: It would certainly have taken time travel to include my work on that particular CD :) ... nonetheless, the Google entry did lead straight to Typeset-Store's Free Fonts page.

I have now managed to email Summitsoft (turns out it was my UK telephone number that threw the contact software) I will report back if/when they reply.
Comment by p2pnut 2nd December 2009
@thalamic: You were not wrong, and I'm afraid, I was not right. I didn't want to test p2pnut's hospitality with more lengthy discussions on this topic, and placed my answer here: Optill 3B
Comment by Frodo7 6th December 2009
Response from Summitsoft:

'The url you refer to is not related to our company at all. I'm not sure who's url or store that is but we do not have any relation to typeset-store.
Thank you,
Summitsoft Helpdesk'

A Google search for 'typeset-store' now throws up no hits, so it looks like this will just have to be filed under 'curiouser and curiouser'.
Comment by p2pnut 8th December 2009
A Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year to the FS Staff and all my fellow Fontstructors
Comment by p2pnut 25th December 2010

Also of Interest

More from the Gallery

RM Romantic Carved shadowby p2pnut
RM Random 3Dby p2pnut
RM Greekby p2pnut
RMWL Uncialicby p2pnut
G1 Radiaby geneus1
Rarangaby Aeolien
fs lostby ETHproductions
Alphabox Liteby p2pnut

From the Blog


Competition: Counter


Our Palace – 10 FontStructive Years


Google Fonts sponsors FontStruct in 2018


Happy Holidays 2017