[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Ongoing Firefox (and Thunderbird) Trademark problems

* Cesar Martinez Izquierdo (dispiste@gmail.com) wrote:
> El Martes 14 Junio 2005 18:54, Humberto Massa Guimarães escribió:
> > > Firefox is free software, and DFSG-compliant: "The license may
> > > require derived works to carry a different name or version number
> > > from the original software." (Even if it is "a compromise").
> >
> > But is non-rebranded Firefox *really* distributable by us under
> > GPL#6, "no further restrictions"? It seems to me that if our users
> > can't customize and compile and distribute Firefox under the terms
> > of the GPL, we are passing along another restriction over those in
> > the GPL.
> Yes, they can customize and compile and distribute Firefox, but they need to 
> pay attention to the trademark issues, as well as patent issues and any other 
> law that may apply in their country.
> > > I think everything is clear enough. And I think it is quite
> > > reasonable that an upstream author asks for a name change for a
> > > modified version. Even for security fixes. There is lots of
> > > modified versions of programs out there and the upstreams authors
> > > are always suffering bug reports that doesn't concern the original
> > > version.
> >
> > So, in this paragraph you are basically stating that we *should*
> > rename firefox to save them from such burden.
> No, I think we should NOT rename Firefox to save our *direct* users from such 
> burden. A lot of people would get greatly confused with a different name for 
> Firefox, even if you don't think so.
> *Indirect* users such as derived distributions should check the licenses and 
> other trademark or patent issues before start distributing anything. It's 
> their task to check it. We can help them if we create Debian packages which 
> are easy to rename, but we shouldn't confuse the rest of the users just to 
> make this task easier to derived distributions.

We're losing sight of the key issue here. We *cannot* use their
trademark under their current trademark policy. They are offering us a
deal that is Debian specific to allow use to use the marks. Can we
accept such a deal as a project? Does the DFSG allow us to? 

Eric Dorland <eric.dorland@mail.mcgill.ca>
ICQ: #61138586, Jabber: hooty@jabber.com
1024D/16D970C6 097C 4861 9934 27A0 8E1C  2B0A 61E9 8ECF 16D9 70C6

Version: 3.12
GCS d- s++: a-- C+++ UL+++ P++ L++ E++ W++ N+ o K- w+ 
O? M++ V-- PS+ PE Y+ PGP++ t++ 5++ X+ R tv++ b+++ DI+ D+ 
G e h! r- y+ 

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: