By Rochelle Ratkaj Moser, Founder and Chief Creative Officer of Ratkaj Designs, a creative agency that brings together the power of design and the purpose of philanthropy. With a focus on accessibility, inclusion, and mission-aligned visual storytelling, Rochelle has spent her career helping nonprofits and social impact organizations better communicate their values, advocate for change, and connect with the communities they serve.
How All Of The Above Are Reshaping Design
How All Of The Above Are Reshaping Design
I got the email on a random Tuesday. The subject line was vague, but the tone was unmistakable — the kind that makes your stomach drop.
“We’ve noticed a potential licensing issue with a font on your website.”
It came from someone in the legal department of a font developer I didn’t recognize, Fontfabric. According to them, there was no record of a license for the typeface I had used — Zing Rust — on our agency’s website. The email referenced their EULA, offered to “help me determine the best license,” and asked for an invoice or proof of purchase.
At first, I thought it was spam. I get emails like that all the time — random font solicitations, phishing attempts, low-effort scare tactics. But something about this one was more…polished. More real. So, I did what any responsible designer would do: I paused everything to check.
Did I mess up?
Did I forget to purchase that font?
Where did I get it from?
Like many of us who’ve been designing since the early 2000s, I came up in the golden era of free font downloads. Sites like DaFont, FontFreak, and FreeFonts.com were our playgrounds. We’d scroll for hours, collecting typefaces like Pokémon. And sure, there wasn’t always a clear license attached — but back then, the internet was wilder, and the stakes were lower.
These days, I run a design agency. I’ve buckled down. We buy our fonts. We use Adobe Fonts when we can. We vet every source and try to do things right. So this email really rattled me.
I dug through my files and found the answer: turns out —I had purchased their font but from a third party—Creative Market. Legally. And that purchase was done at a price that was less than half of what Fontfabric was now demanding. So… why was I being accused?
That’s when I realized this wasn’t just a misunderstanding. It was a playbook.
AI Isn’t Just Watching — It’s Accusing
What I didn’t know at the time — but quickly discovered — is that some type foundries are now using AI-powered bots to scan the internet for font use. These crawlers check CSS files, font-face declarations, and even renderings in images to identify proprietary fonts. They compare that data against licensing databases and, if they can’t find a match, they generate legal-sounding messages that land in designers’ inboxes like mine.
This isn’t about preserving artistic integrity. This is about automated enforcement at scale — scare now, ask questions later. No human context, no client history, no nuance. Just scan, accuse, and settle. In some cases, these systems even cross-reference your domain ownership to estimate your budget, then adjust the price they ask for.
It feels less like protecting creators and more like a bounty system — powered by AI and backed by legal intimidation.
So Who’s Actually Liable?
When I replied to Fontfabric and explained that I had purchased the font through Creative Market, they doubled down:
“As the end-user, you must ensure that the fonts used on your website are appropriately licensed.”
It was…frustrating. Because yes, I did ensure that. I bought it in good faith, through a legitimate third-party platform. I followed the process. So was it really my job to mediate a licensing disagreement between two businesses?
Apparently, yes.
And that’s where this gets murky. Copyright law for fonts is notoriously gray. Fonts themselves often aren’t protected — but the font software is. And every foundry seems to have its own licensing terms. Some treat you like a partner. Others? Like a potential threat.
But what about the designer?
What protections do we have?
None, really. No union. No centralized license database. No safety net if we’re accused. Most of us are independent contractors or run small studios. And suddenly, we’re navigating legal threats because a bot couldn’t find our invoice.
Who’s Terms Apply?
Here’s the thing: when you purchase a font from a third-party platform like Creative Market, you agree to their terms. Not the developers. So, when a developer like Fontfabric comes in afterward and demands adherence to their stricter rules (which you never agreed to), it creates an impossible bind.
This mismatch is more common than you’d think. In one of several Reddit threads, dozens of designers share similar stories. They either bought fonts legally through third-party platforms or downloaded fonts from a site stating that it was free to use, only to be hit with legal emails and pressured to (re)purchase licenses — often at inflated prices.
And some designers pay up. Not because they’re guilty — but because they’re afraid.
What Are Your Rights?
If this happens to you, you have options.
- You do not owe them your invoice, especially if you didn’t purchase directly from them.
- You can request they take up the matter with the platform you did purchase from.
- Keep all communication in writing.
- And if you’re in the wrong (hey, it happens), you can try to resolve it fairly — ideally with documentation and a clear ask.
But you do not need to immediately fold. You don’t owe blind compliance to a threatening email — especially when you’ve acted in good faith.
Ethical Design Shouldn’t Feel Like a Legal Minefield
In my case, I reached out to Creative Market. They confirmed my license and offered to contact Fontfabric directly. That statement — not a receipt, but a private email correspondence— was enough to close the case. I didn’t cave. And I won’t.
Because at the end of the day, this wasn’t about fonts. It was about tone. Approach. Respect.
Had they approached me with curiosity instead of accusation, I probably would have offered more. But when the first contact comes from a licensing department and cites AI-scraped evidence? That’s not a conversation — that’s a threat.
And threats have no place in ethical, creative work.
A Path Forward
Designers want to do the right thing. We do our research, we purchase what we use, and we value creators, we are creators after all. But we shouldn’t have to live in fear of being digitally strong-armed. This AI-driven enforcement model may be legal — but it isn’t ethical. And it’s certainly off putting.
If the creative industry wants to evolve, we need transparency. Clarity. Shared responsibility.
Because being creative should feel expansive — not exhausting.
