Alright. So, you know the fonts that exist in 2.0 and 3.0? Well, there's something wrong with them. You may know that some of the fonts are called what they are. Like Curly, Marker, Handwriting, or Pixel. But one thing I noticed; is that these fonts are used in places other than Scratch. So I came to the conclusion that the people behind Scratch are “borrowing” fonts from sites and branding them as their own. You all may be saying I'm nitpicking, but I think Scratch should use the fonts actual names instead of some dumbed down, simple names.

Hmm… I'm not sure? I've heard on the website that Scratch has joined some sort of Fair Use thing (I have no idea what that is) and that Scratch is not in trouble with copyrights or anything like that because of the Fair Use thingy.

Even if we just want to change the font names to the original ones without issues from copyrights, I semi-support.

Those fonts you are talking about may be considered public domain fonts - anyone is allowed to use them freely.
Also, considering that there are approximately 222 different pixel fonts, on top of the fact that some font names are not the most obvious (look up “Turnstile”, “Ariel”, or “Oswald” if you know what I mean), I think it's okay to put them as their obvious names for the sake of children not yet comprehending the power of word processing.

The Law wrote:

107. Limitations on exclusive rights: Fair use
Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 106 and 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright. In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include—

(1) the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;

(2) the nature of the copyrighted work;

(3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and

(4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.

The fact that a work is unpublished shall not itself bar a finding of fair use if such finding is made upon consideration of all the above factors.

Yeah, Scratch falls under fair use.

All these fonts are fonts you can find and use for free in Google products, so there's nothing wrong with them. I discovered that they're all fonts on Google years ago when I decided to go searching through “more fonts” and found “Curly” (Mystery Quest) and “Marker” (Permanent Marker). When 3.0 came out and I looked at the fonts when checking out the editor and the first thing I thought was “:O Is that Handlee??” (It does sort of look like handwriting :P) But the names were clearly changed to make the fonts look more appealing for kids. I have felt similar about the names being changed, but there's a reason why they were.

[I think the names will have to be reverted to their original anyway if this suggestion gets implemented.]

IndianRuby718 wrote:

snip

Actually, you're not quite right. Here's a comparison image I made:
I found this out by poking around in inspect element until I found the source files, then downloading the font ones and installing them. They already came with their names.
Here's a full list of scratch 3.0 fonts and their real names:

Sans serif — Noto sans
Serif — Source serif pro
Handwriting — Handlee
Marker — Knewave (in italics)
Curly — Griffy
Pixel — Grand9K pixel

Back to the suggestion:
I agree that having just the font names alone could be confusing - in my opinion it's much simpler as it is. I would, however, like to see the font credits in the Credit page or somewhere similar, to make it easier for Scratchers to find the fonts' real names and creators.

whiteandblackcat wrote:

snip

Wait, I forgot that the marker font was changed from 2.0 to 3.0. The 2.0 marker font is most definitely Permanent Marker. But I was wrong on the first one, oh wow those two fonts are so similar though, how is that a coincidence–

Noto Sans
Times New Roman
Handlee
Knewave Italic
Griffy
???
Segoe UI
MS UI Gothic
Segoe UI Semilight

No support, I think the current names are better as they are more descriptive and make more sense.

Drydust24679 wrote:

Noto Sans
Times New Roman
Handlee
Knewave Italic
Griffy
???
Segoe UI
MS UI Gothic
Segoe UI Semilight

The “Sans Serif” font isn't “Noto Sans”.
The “Serif” font is whatever you have set as your browser's serif font, so this changes for everyone. It's mostly Times New Roman.
The “中文” font isn't “Segoe UI”.
The “한국인” font isn't “Segoe UI Semilight”.

Drydust24679 wrote:

Times New Roman

Supposed to be Source Serif Pro but scratch team did a little oopsie (forgot a pair of quotation marks) which made it the browsers default serif font)

Drydust24679 wrote:

Segoe UI
MS UI Gothic
Segoe UI Semilight

nope

mybearworld wrote:

The “Sans Serif” font isn't “Noto Sans”.

But it is?

mybearworld wrote:

Drydust24679 wrote:

Noto Sans
Times New Roman
Handlee
Knewave Italic
Griffy
???
Segoe UI
MS UI Gothic
Segoe UI Semilight

The “Sans Serif” font isn't “Noto Sans”.
The “Serif” font is whatever you have set as your browser's serif font, so this changes for everyone. It's mostly Times New Roman.
The “中文” font isn't “Segoe UI”.
The “한국인” font isn't “Segoe UI Semilight”.

THE SANS SERIF FONT ISNT OPEN SANS EITHER!!!!!!!

mybearworld wrote:

Drydust24679 wrote:

Noto Sans
Times New Roman
Handlee
Knewave Italic
Griffy
???
Segoe UI
MS UI Gothic
Segoe UI Semilight

The “Sans Serif” font isn't “Noto Sans”.
The “Serif” font is whatever you have set as your browser's serif font, so this changes for everyone. It's mostly Times New Roman.
The “中文” font isn't “Segoe UI”.
The “한국인” font isn't “Segoe UI Semilight”.

YES IT IS!!!!!!!!!!!
IT HAS A SIMILARITY!!!!!!!!!

Do you know which fonts I want most? They are Thingamajig, Bree, Roboto Slab, Franklin Gothic Heavy and Catull.
Wait wait wait cut that, including Raleway and Sagona Bold, even with Helvetica and probably Reem Kufi.
Aaand Dosis and SF Pro. The last one was made by Apple.

whiteandblackcat wrote:

IndianRuby718 wrote:

snip

Actually, you're not quite right. Here's a comparison image I made:
I found this out by poking around in inspect element until I found the source files, then downloading the font ones and installing them. They already came with their names.
Here's a full list of scratch 3.0 fonts and their real names:

Sans serif — Noto sans
Serif — Source serif pro
Handwriting — Handlee
Marker — Knewave (in italics)
Curly — Griffy
Pixel — Grand9K pixel

Back to the suggestion:
I agree that having just the font names alone could be confusing - in my opinion it's much simpler as it is. I would, however, like to see the font credits in the Credit page or somewhere similar, to make it easier for Scratchers to find the fonts' real names and creators.

Thank you, someone requested a PFP with handwriting font!

Look, Scratch = Black boys on mopeds font! It's right or wrong?

MontyDoggo wrote:

Alright. So, you know the fonts that exist in 2.0 and 3.0? Well, there's something wrong with them. You may know that some of the fonts are called what they are. Like Curly, Marker, Handwriting, or Pixel. But one thing I noticed; is that these fonts are used in places other than Scratch. So I came to the conclusion that the people behind Scratch are “borrowing” fonts from sites and branding them as their own. You all may be saying I'm nitpicking, but I think Scratch should use the fonts actual names instead of some dumbed down, simple names.

These fonts are not actually named what they are in the paint editor, they have a different name.

Sans-Serif (Noto Sans)
Serif (browser's default serif font)
Marker (Knewave)
Handwriting (Handlee)
Curly (Griffy)
Pixel (Grand9K Pixel)
Chinese (中文) (The CSS ‘“Microsoft YaHei”, “微软雅黑”, STXihei, “华文细黑”’ is used)
Japanese (日本語) (The CSS ‘“ヒラギノ角ゴ Pro W3”, “Hiragino Kaku Gothic Pro”, Osaka, “メイリオ”, Meiryo, “ＭＳ Ｐゴシック”, “MS PGothic”’ is used)
Korean (한국어) (Malgun Gothic, which is usually preinstalled on computers)

Also the scratch font: (not used in 3.0 anymore. and made by a non-scratch user) Black Boys on Mopeds

JimmiesAndTheMakers wrote:

Look, Scratch = Black boys on mopeds font! It's right or wrong?

right

whiteandblackcat wrote:

(#6)

IndianRuby718 wrote:

snip

Actually, you're not quite right. Here's a comparison image I made:
I found this out by poking around in inspect element until I found the source files, then downloading the font ones and installing them. They already came with their names.
Here's a full list of scratch 3.0 fonts and their real names:

Sans serif — Noto sans
Serif — Source serif pro
Handwriting — Handlee
Marker — Knewave (in italics)
Curly — Griffy
Pixel — Grand9K pixel

Back to the suggestion:
I agree that having just the font names alone could be confusing - in my opinion it's much simpler as it is. I would, however, like to see the font credits in the Credit page or somewhere similar, to make it easier for Scratchers to find the fonts' real names and creators.

i know handlee and knewave and noto sans

What exactly was wrong with these?

I mean they're easy to understand and marker is called that because it looks like the letters on a marker.