Where can I get the Amazon font? Thanks.
Type it into Google
1 Like
It’s called Amazon Ember and designed specifically for them. You can check it out on their developer site, but you would have to read through the user agreement to see what allowed and what isn’t.
Oh, I see. I wanted to use it for mockery purposes, and obviously they wouldn’t allow that. Anything close to it?
Are you asking about their logotype that spells out amazon.com? I’m pretty sure it was based on a typeface called Officina Sans, which costs money. I’m pretty sure there are some knock-off versions. Just Googling “Amazon typeface” led me to some.
I was inquiring about the Amazon with the orange arrow. Yes, Officina Sans bold looks pretty close.
That’s what I said 
3 Likes
RedKittieKat makes an excellent (and highly important) point—some corporate fonts are definitely proprietary and you can get into big time trouble if you use them.
It sounds as if the OP is actually looking for the Amazon logo instead. if that’s the case, if it is student work, or being used in a mockup it’s fairly easy to get a vector version of the Amazon logo.
CraigB, I was intending to continue writing in the Amazon logo font, so I already used the Officina Sans Medium. It was pretty close to the original Amazon logo.
PopsD and RedKittieKat, I am not a contractor for Amazon to follow their policies. I am mocking the corporation just like a caricaturist would.
Caricaturists draw funny pictures of people, often with their permission.
If you don’t have permission from Amazon to use their font, or their logo, even in a likening, you are in violation of copyright.
1 Like
Well, to clarify, in the US, parodies are protected. I’m no lawyer, so do what you need to in order to make sure you’re covered legally. Especially if you’re planning on printing, selling or otherwise publicly hosting or showcasing what you produce.
1 Like
Yes. In the U.S., the 1st amendment to the U.S. Constitution makes the freedom of expression sacrosanct. No permission is needed to use their logo or other branding as long as its use is for the purpose of making a commentary or expressing an opinion — parodies included. Libel and slander, on the other hand, aren’t protected, and sometimes there’s a fine line that one needs to be careful not to cross.
2 Likes
This thread slipped away from the subject topic, so let’s end it here.
I disagree; this is entirely pertinent and useful, generally. How we use other people’s intellectual property legally is of huge import.
On that note…
Years ago, my ex-wife, who was a trade journalist at the time, was sent on a course about libel and slander and how to avoid falling foul of it. It seems that in the UK, all humour is exempt from both. Of course a lot of humour sails very close to the wind, by its very nature, so always best to be very sure of your ground.
I caveat this with the fact I am not a lawyer, that this is hearsay and is from 20 years ago, so the law may have changed. Fascinating though that the law exempts prosecution, as long as you are trying to be funny.
If this thread was moved to some other section so that it doesn’t deceive people what it is about, I’ll not join the discussion, because in general debates don’t change people’s views; they rather affirm people’s old views and polarize the listeners. I’ve read on what the hell is “property” – a culture-bred whim we have in an epoch of time in human social evolution. It varies from person to person, to society to society, and so forth… And by coincidence today I listened to a podcast on that same topic too… and we can just waste hours and hours, sprout, and at the end your views and my views will not change… So, I personally will not join.
I’m sorry @jmsjms, but this is a discussion forum. You posted something for discussion, but you don’t get to control the discussion that stems from it — despite how far it veers off in one direction or another.
The responses others have given, including my own, weren’t necessarily meant for just you, but rather to comment on the various things that came up during the conversation. Many of the more popular topics on the forum head off into various tangents, which is a good thing. I’m not quite sure why you’re objecting to it.
From my experience in different forums, if the discussion is not according to the subject line, then the moderators can intervene; they are keeping the forums orderly. This a typography discussion, not “property” discussion section, so to me it makes sense typography to be discussed, not “property.” But even if you guys want to discuss the invention of “property” then you will get way more comments in other more appropriate forums such as philosophy forums or some kind of political forums.
Different forums do things in different ways. I am a moderator here, and to me the subject throughout the discussion seems to have been related to type, of which licensing and ownership are a part.
The only thing that’s veered too far away from typography and their use in logos is the discussion we’re having now. Even if it did veer wildly off subject, moving a thread titled “Where can I get the Amazon font” would make little sense in another forum topic. Even if I retitled the post, the subject would still be primarily about typography and its use in logo since that’s mostly been what’s discussed. Sometimes, there’s a radical break in the continuity of a thread that warrants breaking a thread in two, but we’re not even close to that here.
If you want me to, I can move the whole thing into the General Design category, but I’m still failing to understand why you’re concerned about it.
Just-B, my initial question of the Amazon font/name got resolved. You can move the thread outside of the graphic design discussion. You can guys discuss it there. Why would I be needed in that discussion: Am I so vital to the continuation of the What is “property” discussion? A business’ font “property” can’t be discussed without discussing what is “property,” and as I already said – it varies according to various situations, people’s educations, geographic regions, time of year, and so forth. I don’t bow down to a business’ “property” claims, just as a business doesn’t care about harassing me with their annoying ads. To a business I am a consumer who holds the money that they are looking to extract from me; they have no ethical compass to stop doing so because in a monetary culture there’s nothing more important than extracting the most money they can out of the consumers.