[Bug 269656] Re: AN IRRELEVANT LICENSE IS PRESENTED TO YOU FREE-OF-CHARGE ON STARTUP

[kafpauzo]

Maybe the following can help a little in clarifying where the problem is
and what is needed.

I think the most important drawback of a click-and-accept EULA is that
it shatters the wonderfully welcoming experience of installing Ubuntu.

I migrated from Windows to Ubuntu somewhat recently. I was delighted by
the impression that loving care had been put into offering me a
carefully composed system, with a beautiful theme, along with impressive
repositories where I can feel warmly welcome any time I want to add
something to my system.

All in all it was an amazing and joyous experience. And this happy
experience was much more important than the money saved. It made me
warmly enthusiastic about Ubuntu in a way that I had never expected.

In this context, a series of click-through EULAs for various
applications would become seriously jarring. Very little of that warmly
welcoming feeling would survive.

It would be almost as bad if there's a first Web page that pushes me
down with wordings like "you are consenting to be bound by the
Agreement".

It's very different if software that I pick and choose from the
repositories shows such EULAs. As long as it's a minority among the
applications, and doesn't grow out of hand, it won't mar the feeling of
a welcoming Ubuntu, since it's something outside Ubuntu that I pick
myself. Then if I don't like the conditions and prefer to uninstall the
software, I know clearly that the consequence of this choice is limited
to the removal of that particular software.

But if it happens while I'm installing Ubuntu itself, it will inevitably
ruin that delightful experience.

Having said that, maybe the default browser can go to a special first
page without marring the experience. In the Fedora solution, the wording
of their first page is unwelcoming and unclear, in my view. But it might
work if instead it's worded as an offer to protect me against phishers,
adding to this the caveat that this requires a polling that could
theoretically reveal the times when I'm online and offline. If it's a
concretely explained offer to help me, with a concretely worded caveat,
the feeling of warm welcome remains.

The Fedora text and the Agreement that it links to make a serious
mistake, in that they don't mention anti-phishing. The wording is so
vague that it's impossible for the user to understand what he's
"agreeing" to. This renders the "agreement" legally void, and so its
only effect is to cause feelings of uncertainty. Speak up! Explain
clearly! Use concrete wordings! And ban the lawyers except for final
vetting.

-- 
AN IRRELEVANT LICENSE IS PRESENTED TO YOU FREE-OF-CHARGE ON STARTUP
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/269656
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Mozilla
Bugs, which is subscribed to firefox-3.0 in ubuntu.