Firefox newly insists on showing an EULA

Neal McBurnett neal at
Mon Sep 15 15:19:22 UTC 2008

On Mon, Sep 15, 2008 at 02:12:52PM +0300, Peteris Krisjanis wrote:
> IMHO, several ways to handle that:
> 1) Cave in to Mozilla request (Trademarks are trademarks. They are
> bitch and their protection are somehow incompatible with free
> software. But that's life)
> 2) Provide Iceweasel and rebrand it as Ubuntu Web browser, and provide
> easy way to install Firefox from universe. Those who will care will
> install it, OEMs will install it on new boxes by default anyway, and
> those who care about libre, will stay clean.
> 3) Ditch Firefox as default browser in Intrepid+1 and go on with
> Epiphany/Webkit. Still, provide easy way to install FF.
> One big point is that most users who would like to see Firefox as
> "familiar" brand are OEM users anyway - they will get their browser
> installed by support guys. Also Hardy still get FF 3.0 without EULA
> (so far), so propably not so much to worry about.

Thanks for listing some options. My gut reaction is to do #2 above:
reluctantly drop the problematic Firefox brand and go with a brand
that doesn't introduce trademark and EULA hassles for our users and

But first I'd like to actually read the EULA, and I'm surprised no one
has posted the text of it (as far as I have found) to this discussion
or to the bug.  Though the bug is so verbose now that I haven't
managed to read all the way thru, I must admit - but I didn't see any


Neal McBurnett       

More information about the Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list