I like the Humor Sans font and have been using it to create infographics. These are png/jpg files and do not contain information about the font typeface, nor do they contain any of the source code of the font ttf files.
The font/ttf files are licensed under this license, which states;
[This license] allows the licensed fonts to be used, studied, modified and redistributed freely as long as they are not sold by themselves. The fonts, including any derivative works, can be bundled, embedded, redistributed and/or sold with any software provided that any reserved names are not used by derivative works. The fonts and derivatives, however, cannot be released under any other type of license. The requirement for fonts to remain under this license does not apply to any document created using the fonts or their derivatives.
My understanding of what constitutes derivative works comes from this online document, which states that;
A derivative work is based on a work that has already been copyrighted.
My initial assumption based on this was that producing an image file that is generated using the font is a form of derivative works. However, this assumption has led me to some confusion, as I am now reading the two bold sentences as contradictory:
The fonts and derivatives, however, cannot be released under any other type of license
This seems to tell me that my image has to be licensed under the same license.
The requirement for fonts to remain under this license does not apply to any document created using the fonts or their derivatives.
My lay understanding here is that an image file is almost certainly a document created using the font. So this seems to suggest I am exempt from any licensing requirements.
So which is it?
I live in Australia, but my content will be published from a webserver in the United States.