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

Re: Ongoing Firefox (and Thunderbird) Trademark problems

* Raphael Hertzog (raphael@ouaza.com) wrote:
> Le jeudi 16 juin 2005 à 01:03 -0400, Eric Dorland a écrit :
> > > The Mozilla Foundation have made many shows of good faith via Gervase in
> > > this long running debate which he has continued to follow despite the
> > > criticisms levelled at him/the Mozilla Foundation.  Obviously if they
> > > turn around in the future and say "oh we hate your blah patch you can't
> > > use the name" then we can /then/ make it a big issue and change the name
> > > to iceweasel and be happy.  I honestly think this is unlikely though and
> > > to do so now would be not only be premature but be harmful to users and
> > > your/the project's relationship with Mozilla.
> > 
> > Well actually to some degree they've already done this. Recently the
> > CAcert  (www.cacert.org) project's root CA made it into our
> > ca-certificates package. However I can't have Firefox use that as a
> > root CA by default and still use the trademark:
> > 
> > http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.security.cacert/2752
> > 
> > This seems like a pretty unacceptable to me.
> Given the trademark license, you can just add the CA-Cert and wait until
> MoFo complains to you... if they decide to complain !

Ummm, did you read the thread? It was pretty clear they would not find
it acceptable.

> Another approach (which would be more respectful to MoFo) would be to
> ask them to add the CA certificate into upstream's list of trusted CA so
> that the whole issue becomes a non-issue for us. We're all reasonable
> people, if we add that CA cert it's because we trust them. Given our
> track of security consciousness I see no reason why MoFo wouldn't trust
> what we trust (that's even the reason why they made an exceptin).

Will the add the SPI root CA to their root CA list? It's pretty Debian
specific, so I doubt it. 

> Third approach is to ask again for an exception concerning this change.
> Choose whatever you prefer. In any case it doesn't change anything to
> the status of the software ... Firefox with its original name is free
> software and should be included as-is within Debian.
> Furthermore I'm sure that you can avoid that problem by using a debconf
> question: "Do you want to add the CA certs contained in CA-certificates
> in the list of CA trusted by Firefox ?"
> We don't change the list of CA certs but we're letting the user change
> it on his own machine. And I suppose that this has always been
> possible... (it was just more difficult for the user)
> Cheers,

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: