Probably. It all depends on your definition of “same type.”
There have been tens of thousands of type families created. New typefaces generally have some similarity to existing ones. After all, if they didn’t have some similarity, we couldn’t even recognize the characters, right? It is just a question of how similar they are.
Some areas of type design have less room for variation than others. For example, making a humanist sans serif that is deliberately very neutral and without strong flavor really limits the scope. As a result, typefaces such as Myriad and Segoe have significant resemblance to the earlier iconic humanist sans, Frutiger. A few people see Myriad and/or Segoe as derivative or even knockoffs of Frutiger. I wouldn’t say knockoffs, and probably not even call them derivative… although to be fair, Frutiger established what has become an entire genre of typefaces! I believe that Myriad and Segoe each innovated about as far as it could within that general genre, essentially in opposite directions from Frutiger, but without having some methodical scheme of must-be-different-as-much-as-possible.
Frutiger (Linotype, Adrian Frutiger, 1975):
Myriad (Adobe, Twombly/Slimbach, 1992):
Segoe (Monotype, Steve Matteson, 2004):
Yes, they all have similarities. But they also all have differences (and not just that the “regular” weight of Frutiger is bolder!). One systematic difference: Frutiger has strokes cut at a slight angle but near the vertical, Myriad at a right angle to the current stem, and Segoe keeps rigidly to the vertical/horizontal ending cuts. This is not just a technical difference; it creates an entirely different feel for each typeface. Myriad is the warmest and most friendly of the three, and Segoe the most… constrained.
Frutiger himself in his Complete Works wrote:
“That Adobe, in 1992, would bring out a similar typeface to *Frutiger* — […] — I found that a little inappropriate. Nevertheless, I wouldn’t write such a letter today. My perspectives have widened; of course that’s got something to do with age — you get more easygoing. Why shouldn’t a good typeface be developed further by a third party? When I see today that someone has taken my thoughts and developed them further, I’m even proud of that.”
(Hat tip to Kris Sowersby for pointing out the quote!)
I am reminded of a science fiction story (as best as I recall it) about a future dystopia in which experiencing art/music/literature of the past is forbidden. A composer is caught having listened to a bunch of Beethoven. But she was so careful not to be influenced! How was she caught? All the Beethoven-like elements in her compositions suddenly disappeared after she was exposed to Beethoven and suppressed previous naturally-occurring similarities.
I think that is instructive on several levels. 😄
We are certainly influenced by other works, but trying too hard to avoid any such influences may lead to more distortion of free creativity than simply accepting that some similarities are likely to occur —especially in a craft that has hundreds of years of history, and usually needs to meet certain functional needs.
This does not mean that you can’t be excessively derivative. That is still true.
But a typographer or type designer may see more differences than the average lay person. And even experts may disagree on how similar two typefaces are — in a recent French font case where Jean François Porchez sued Jean-Baptiste Levee, both sides had heavyweight opinions in their favor.*
Also, none of this is to say that “revivals” of old typefaces, or other derivative riffs on an existing design are, or should be, forbidden — as long as that design is no longer protected, or is open source, or permission is otherwise obtained.
I have myself done a fairly straight revival of Hermann Ihlenburg’s Columbus (1892), as well as a revival-plus-massive-expansion of Morris Fuller Benton’s Bank Gothic (1930–35). In both cases the original designer and even the company that issued the typeface are both long gone.
This is arguably starting to drift toward a discussion of when it is legally okay to make a similar font, as opposed to ethically. That is a much more complex question, with an answer that may vary at least somewhat depending on the jurisdiction, and whether the type designer availed themselves of registration for their design (meaning design patent in the USA, other kinds of design rights elsewhere).
* Including my own.
Leave a Reply