Will Firefox no longer be named Firefox?

[Micah J. Cowan]

On Mon, Sep 25, 2006 at 02:47:33AM +0530, Shriramana Sharma wrote:
> "Bon Echo" is Mozilla's internal code for a new software version that
> is being developed. Just like "Longhorn", if you will pardon the
> reference) It should be Firefox Bon Echo, just like W* Longhorn.
> Besides, I think:

Thanks for clearing that up.

> https://launchpad.net/distros/ubuntu/+source/firefox/+bug/9318
> 
> is also relevant. We have Mozilla developers on that bug who say they
> have no objections to the Firefox icon being used. If so, then why
> should the Firefox name not be used?
> 
> If the Firefox name is not used, it will be a terrible confusion,
> IMHO. New users coming to Ubuntu will look for "Firefox", not see it,
> and say "yuck - what a stupid distro that doesn't even have Firefox"
> and go away. (OK that's a bit exaggerated, but you get the idea.)

Yes, but in reading the debian bug that was brought up
(http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=354622), there appear
to be some concerns about whether even obtaining such a permission to
use Firefox trademarks puts them at an advantage over their users (who
might also wish to make changes, patches, etc, and don't have permission
to do so while continuing to use the trademarks). There are also
concerns about how "reversible" such a situation might be, and the
problems that might raise, given that we can't "unrelease" a package
once it's released. (This is all according to my, probably limited,
understanding, after a cursory reading of related material. Please,
nobody not go by what I'm saying untl you've read through it yourself.)

I agree that removing the very well-known Firefox branding has some very
significant potential consequences. However, if we actually _are_ in a
situation where we pretty much have to live in fear of even a
theoretical revocation of permission (it's not at all clear to me that
this is the case, only that the question has been raised by someone); or
if our freedom to develop, or the freedom of our users, is hampered in
some way, then the change in branding would seem well-justified, to me.

And, at least to some extent, "A rose by any other name..." :) ...
people would recognize, at the least, that we have an excellent browser.
And that's all anyone /ought/ to care about.

Again, please don't construe anything I've said as an endorsement of
changing the branding: I would endorse it /only/ if it were clear that
the above scenarios were reality. (This is my CYA paragraph :) )

-- 
Micah J. Cowan
Programmer, musician, typesetting enthusiast, gamer...
http://micah.cowan.name/