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

Creak romain.failliot at gmail.com
Wed Sep 24 13:29:45 UTC 2008


2008/9/24 Mark Shuttleworth <mark at canonical.com>

> No, if we want to use the Firefox brand, then we must work with Mozilla,
> and that's reasonable. If we don't want to use the brand, they have
> kindly given us lots of rights to the code they have so lovingly produced.
>

I do more and more agree with you Mark. A company has the right to preserve
its image (aka brand, logo, ...).
I just wonder why Debian created Iceweasel then? I know Debian are real
zealots about the free software, but I also trust them on this subject. So
I'm a bit confuse here...
Maybe I'm wrong, but I understood that they did few Debian-specific
modifications. But as long as they modified Firefox, they can't reuse the
name.
If I'm right until then, why don't they send their modifications to Mozilla?
Mozilla refused?
Imagine you have an Ubuntu-specific feature to add to Firefox. Mozilla
doesn't want it for some reason... What's your choice? Abandon your
modification or change the name?

I'm not trying to make a point here, I'm just trying to understand a bit
better all the consequences :)

-- 
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.




More information about the Ubuntu-mozillateam-bugs mailing list