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

Re: Ongoing Firefox (and Thunderbird) Trademark problems

* Marco d'Itri (md@Linux.IT) wrote:
> On Jun 15, Eric Dorland <eric@debian.org> wrote:
> > > It's an important part in evaluating the balance between the priorities
> > > of our users and free software...
> > And where do we strike that balance in this case? I think gaining more
> > freedom for our users is the best thing in the long run. Sure, there
> > will be shorter term pain, but we need to take the long view. 
> I'm here to build the best free OS, not to collect the most liberal
> trademarks. If a trademark license allows us to ship the software the
> way we want and there are no practical problems in removing trademark
> references if it were ever needed then I think it's obvious that we
> would do a disservice to our users by removing from Debian such a widely
> know trademark without a good reason.

Well the whole issue is I don't believe we're allowed to ship the
software the way we want. We would be compromising our principles by
doing so. 
> There are good reasons for a trademark license to be restrictive and I
> believe that the MF made a good case about their one, so I do not think
> that it's important for users to have the permission to use it however
> they want. The code is still free no matter how it is branded so this
> is not an issue of software freedom, at best this is a marketing issue.

I never asked them to give users permission to use it however they
want. But their current permissions are too restrictive. 

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: