Re: [Legal] Firefox not truly Free?
William Ballard <nospam_50301@alltel.net> writes:
> I don't know what to make of this statement:
>
> http://news.zdnet.co.uk/0,39020330,39189475,00.htm
> [quote]
> The main disadvantage of the deal with Google is that native language
> versions of Firefox are not permitted to change the default search
> engine to one that is more useful for searching Web pages in a
> particular language.[/quote]
>
> I don't want to be a chicken little, but in what sense is this statement
> valid? It seems to have extraordinary implications, not in the least
> that Firefox and Mozilla would have to be considered Non-Free.
>
> Is it merely advistory or a request? I know there was some talk about
> Debian Thunderbird; here's some more fuel for the fire!
>
> What gives?
The paragraph following the one you quoted begins like so:
"That [the Google deal] is why official localised builds are not
allowed to change the search engine," said Markham.
If this restriction only applies to official (provided by mozilla.org,
I presume) builds, I can't see a problem. No deal the Mozilla
Foundation signs can stop anyone from exercising rights granted by the
license of the software.
--
Måns Rullgård
mru@inprovide.com
Reply to: