CPG Grey has a great video on the Interstate Highway System (https://youtu.be/8Fn_30AD7Pk)
Lost me the second I saw that font on the I-90 shield.
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on February 10, 2022, 04:52:59 PM
Lost me the second I saw that font on the I-90 shield.
Knowing Grey, I wouldn't be surprised if this was for legal reasons since the Interstate shield is technically copyrighted.
Quote from: stevashe on February 10, 2022, 06:48:56 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on February 10, 2022, 04:52:59 PM
Lost me the second I saw that font on the I-90 shield.
Knowing Grey, I wouldn't be surprised if this was for legal reasons since the Interstate shield is technically copyrighted.
I should note that I was kind of being sarcastic in that original post. There is a habit in the hobby to flip out over non-MUTCD complaint signage in posts and graphics. If anyone wants a real assessment of the video, I found it sufficient enough to illustrate Interstate conventions.
That said, who in the Federal Government is actually going to try to enforce the Interstate copyright? There is a whole lot of merchandise out there such as reproduction shields, shirts and stickers that would be way more in violation than a fair use graphic.
He's left a few notes in the Reddit thread (https://www.reddit.com/r/CGPGrey/comments/spa2n6/the_interstates_forgotten_code/) for the video, mainly for content cut for time.
Quote from: stevashe on February 10, 2022, 06:48:56 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on February 10, 2022, 04:52:59 PM
Lost me the second I saw that font on the I-90 shield.
Knowing Grey, I wouldn't be surprised if this was for legal reasons since the Interstate shield is technically copyrighted.
The font is public domain, however. (Actually, fonts can't be copyright/trademarked in the United States, only their names.)
I'm amused that the line that appears when he mentions I-50 not existing basically follows the US-412 corridor (there's been a debate in Central States about whether or not 412 is worthy of the I-50 designation when it's upgraded).
Really liked this video, especially the humor, like spray painting a leading 0 in front of I-5. Like how he mentioned that the first digit choice of 3di that goes between two different 2di is inconsistent. Also, the part about wanting an I-995 in Maryland just to complete their set :clap:
Quote from: Scott5114 on February 10, 2022, 09:26:25 PM
Quote from: stevashe on February 10, 2022, 06:48:56 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on February 10, 2022, 04:52:59 PM
Lost me the second I saw that font on the I-90 shield.
Knowing Grey, I wouldn't be surprised if this was for legal reasons since the Interstate shield is technically copyrighted.
The font is public domain, however. (Actually, fonts can't be copyright/trademarked in the United States, only their names.)
I'm amused that the line that appears when he mentions I-50 not existing basically follows the US-412 corridor (there's been a debate in Central States about whether or not 412 is worthy of the I-50 designation when it's upgraded).
Technically nothing created by the US Government or its departments can be copywritten/copyrighted, so there cannot be a copyright on the Interstate Shield, regardless of what is claimed.
Quote from: TEG24601 on February 18, 2022, 10:44:31 AM
Quote from: Scott5114 on February 10, 2022, 09:26:25 PM
Quote from: stevashe on February 10, 2022, 06:48:56 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on February 10, 2022, 04:52:59 PM
Lost me the second I saw that font on the I-90 shield.
Knowing Grey, I wouldn't be surprised if this was for legal reasons since the Interstate shield is technically copyrighted.
The font is public domain, however. (Actually, fonts can't be copyright/trademarked in the United States, only their names.)
I'm amused that the line that appears when he mentions I-50 not existing basically follows the US-412 corridor (there's been a debate in Central States about whether or not 412 is worthy of the I-50 designation when it's upgraded).
Technically nothing created by the US Government or its departments can be copywritten/copyrighted, so there cannot be a copyright on the Interstate Shield, regardless of what is claimed.
The Interstate shield is not copyrighted, but it is a registered trademark of AASHTO (which is not a governmental agency), and I believe the main purpose of that trademark is to prevent DOTs from signing roads as interstates without AASHTO's approval.
Regardless of the actual copyright status, video creators do need to toe the line around whatever YouTube might think of it. There's a lot of fraudulent copyright sniping done on the platform that can ruin a creator's revenue for months, so many err on the side of caution with assets that aren't 100% theirs (and even then, they still can get burned).
I think it's more likely that CPG Grey just changed the font as a form of artistic license rather than any sort of copyright concern.
While there are some agencies that are extremely strict about their shields being used for for-profit enterprises (NJTA has sent a cease-and-desist to someone selling replica Turnpike shields), Interstate shields are more or less fair game, as AASHTO doesn't actually seem to enforce the trademark. I think the reason for the trademark was mostly to have a cause of action against businesses trying to deceive motorists into thinking their billboards were legitimate traffic control devices. That seems to be a concern that never materialized.
A couple non-roads friends sent me the link (one even bragged how WI was excluded - in favor of it's competitor... North Carolina!)