Font License Inspector
Licence terms
The licence of most Google Fonts. Compatible with commercial use; the font itself may not be sold on its own.
Comparison
| Licence | Webfont | App embed | Modify | Redistribute |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| yes | yes | yes | yes, with the licence and copyright notice | |
| yes | yes | yes | yes, with the licence, notice and change statements | |
| yes | yes | yes | yes, with the licence | |
| yes | yes | yes | yes, with the copyright and licence text | |
| check the readme | check the readme | usually no | usually no | |
| usually an extra webfont licence | usually a separate app-embedding licence | no | no |
This is a reference for the licence families, not legal advice, and licences get amended: read the actual LICENSE file that shipped with the font. The comparison exists to make clear which questions to ask it.
Audit checklist for Racira Sans
| Question | Why it matters | |
|---|---|---|
| Is the font's source recorded (foundry, URL, download date)? | A licence claim is worthless without knowing exactly which release it applies to. | |
| Is the licence file stored beside the font files? | Most licences require the notice to travel with the font, including in a repository. | |
| Does the licence explicitly allow webfont serving? | The right to self-host differs from the right to serve; some permissive-looking fonts restrict web embedding. | |
| Does the licence allow app embedding if the font ships in a mobile build? | App embedding is often a separate grant from desktop use. | |
| Does the licence allow modification and subsetting? | Subsetting modifies the file; some licences restrict modified versions. | |
| If modified, has the font been renamed as required? | Reserved font names are protected by OFL-style clauses. | |
| Is the attribution shown where the licence requires it? | Some licences require credit in the product's about screen or documentation. | |
| Is the licence reference recorded in the project's asset manifest? | Future contributors need to know the terms without re-researching them. |
Manifest entry
/* Racira Sans — font asset manifest entry */
{
"family": "Racira Sans",
"source": "<foundry or URL>",
"version": "<release/date>",
"license": "SIL Open Font License 1.1 (OFL-1.1)",
"webfontAllowed": true,
"appEmbeddingAllowed": true,
"modificationAllowed": true,
"licenseFile": "assets/fonts/racira-sans/LICENSE.txt"
}Storing the terms next to the font is what prevents the same research being repeated — and repeated wrongly — the next time the asset is touched.
You Might Also Need
The font license inspector states what the common font licences permit — webfont serving, app embedding, modification and redistribution — and walks a project's fonts through an eight-point audit. It does not read terms out of a font binary.
What is Font License Inspector?
The font license inspector answers the question that decides whether a font can ship: what does its licence allow? It presents a comparison of the licence families fonts are actually released under, each with its SPDX identifier and a per-permission answer, plus a checklist for auditing the fonts already in a project and a manifest entry that records the result next to the asset. You choose a licence, name the font being audited and work through the checklist; the panel reports the SPDX identifier, whether webfont serving and app embedding are permitted, whether modification and subsetting are allowed and what attribution is required.
- Licence families compared: SIL Open Font License 1.1 (OFL-1.1), Apache License 2.0, Ubuntu Font Licence 1.0, MIT/Expat, Freeware or unknown terms, and commercial desktop-licensed fonts.
- The comparison table carries four permission columns — webfont serving, app embedding, modification and redistribution — and any row can be selected to load its terms.
- Audit checklist, eight items: whether the source is recorded, whether the licence file is stored beside the font, whether webfont serving is explicitly allowed, whether app embedding is covered, whether modification and subsetting are permitted, whether a modified font has been renamed, whether attribution is in place, and whether the terms are recorded in the project's asset manifest.
- Progress and status readouts: a count of completed items and a status that reads audit complete, in progress, or not yet audited.
- Manifest output: a JSON entry with the family, source, version, licence name and SPDX identifier, three boolean permission flags and the expected licence file path.
The answers differ in exactly the ways that catch teams out. OFL-1.1 permits commercial use, webfont serving and modification, but a derivative must use a different reserved name and the licence must travel with the font. Apache-2.0 is permissive with an explicit patent grant and asks for the notice file plus a statement of changes. MIT is rare for fonts but occasionally used for small releases. Freeware and unknown terms are treated as an unknown: the tool answers "check the readme" rather than implying a right. A commercial desktop licence typically covers design use only, with webfont serving and app embedding sold as separate grants — which is precisely the situation where a project ships a font it never had permission to serve. The manifest entry exists so that question is answered once, in the repository, instead of being re-researched wrongly by the next person who touches the asset.
- Six licence families are covered, not the whole SPDX list. Anything unusual has to be read directly.
- It cannot detect a font's licence. Terms live in the accompanying licence file, not in a name table, and no file is opened here.
- The manifest flags are derived from the selected licence family, so an answer such as "check the readme" produces a false permission rather than a verdict.
- Checklist state lives in the page only and resets on reload, so the completed audit is the manifest entry, not the ticks.
- It is a reference, not legal advice, and licences get amended — the LICENSE file that shipped with the font is the authority.
Treat it as the pre-flight check before a font is self-hosted or bundled: select the licence, read the permissions that matter for the delivery, then record the outcome in the manifest so the decision survives the project. The narrower engineering questions that follow — how the declaration is shaped, how heavy the file is and how much of the alphabet is actually needed — belong to the font CSS generator, the font base64 encoder and the character extractor. If the audit concludes the font is not distributable, the pairings and stacks built from system and open faces are where the design continues.
How to use Font License Inspector
- Select the licence the font ships under and name the font being audited.
- Read the permission readouts for webfont serving, app embedding, modification and attribution before touching any asset.
- Work through the eight audit questions, leaving the ones you cannot answer unchecked.
- Copy the manifest entry into the project's asset record, replacing the source and version placeholders with the real values.
When to use Font License Inspector vs related tools
Open it before self-hosting a font or bundling one into an app, because those are the two cases where a desktop licence is not sufficient on its own. The engineering work that follows depends on the answer: how the declaration is written is the font CSS generator's job, how the file is delivered is the font base64 encoder's, and how large the delivered file needs to be is what the font character extractor establishes before any subset is cut. When a licence permits modification, the @font-face declaration builder is where the modified file's declaration and metric overrides get written.
Privacy & Security
This tool runs entirely in your browser — no data ever leaves your device. There is no server round-trip, no upload, no logging, and no account required. Your input is processed locally using client-side JavaScript and is never stored, transmitted, or accessible to anyone else. When you close the tab, everything disappears.