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

Re: Ongoing Firefox (and Thunderbird) Trademark problems

* Simon Huggins (huggie@earth.li) wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 15, 2005 at 08:20:48PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> > Peter Samuelson <peter@p12n.org> writes:
> > > That there is such a hue and cry over rebranding Firefox in Debian
> > > indicates to me that it *is* a significant burden we would be (and are
> > > now) asking of our downstream users.
> > Second, the real problems with rebranding are not with the technical
> > work that has to happen, from the sound of it.  They're with user
> > recognition and the ability of users to find the right package for
> > something they want to run.  That *is* a significant issue, at least
> > in my opinion, but Debian taking that hit doesn't do *anything* to
> > help our downstream users.  They still end up having to either take
> > the same hit or now undo Debian work to get back to the name that
> > their users will recognize.
> I was under the impression that downstreams could call the packages
> firefox as they had been blessed with official Debian penguin pee as
> long as they didn't then change them and it was only when they were
> modified that they potentially had to go to the Mozilla Foundation for a
> license.

That is correct, but (correct me if I'm wrong Gerv), but "change"
would include such things as recompiling it. 
> Did I get the wrong end of the stick?

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: