In the United States and other western developed countries, the protection of public intellectual property rights is no less than that of private and state-owned intellectual property rights. Under that condition, it is impossible for those countries to have private or state-owned character fonts, so there will be no "one day, China people will buy China fonts from foreign font dealers" because of font demand.
It should be noted that the report confuses "font" and "font library" and confuses the basic concepts. The so-called "font library" is the machine coding of characters in a certain language, not the font coding. For example, the national standard content of the Chinese character "font library" only contains the machine code of each Chinese character, but does not include the codes of those Chinese character fonts. Font code has the nature of technological invention, so it can be private, state-owned or public intellectual property. For another example, the "font library" of character coding has and must have national and international official standards, while fonts have no and it is difficult to establish national or international official standards; This also shows that "font" and "font library" are different concepts and different knowledge categories, that is, they are not the same thing.
In developed countries such as the United States, if a design is to become a national standard or an international standard, laws and regulations often allow its inventor to retain the right of invention and design, but he must publicly give up private property rights or declare that all people can use it freely and free of charge, that is to say, the design property rights that become a standard should be consistent with the ownership or use right of the standard: if it is a national standard, the design property rights belong to the state and the use right belongs to all users of the state; Is an international standard, the design property belongs to the international community, and the right to use belongs to all users of the international community.
As far as computers are concerned, for the convenience of use, electronic codes such as font codes, keyboard codes and printer codes of different languages are often mixed in a system file or a subsystem. However, that is the way of use, not the way of property rights. For example, telegrams, telexes and computer operating systems of American companies all include character storage and calling in various languages, and they all enjoy private property rights, but companies are not allowed to declare property rights in fonts.
In a word, the report reflects a fact: in China, official legislators, social businessmen, scholars engaged in research and media engaged in communication all have inaccurate or even confusing understandings of the so-called private ownership, state ownership and public ownership. It seems that when we talk about property rights protection, we are protecting private property rights. This chaotic state is not only reflected in fonts, but also in the establishment of national standards. For example, many so-called "national standards" are also private property rights or consumers cannot use them freely and arbitrarily; Of course, this practice will encourage the whole China society to practice favoritism and malpractice, and combine officials and businessmen to make use of official relations and open the market.