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

Re: Ongoing Firefox (and Thunderbird) Trademark problems

On Jun 16, Eric Dorland <eric@debian.org> wrote:

> I'm not trying to say it's non-free. It is free. What I'm trying to
> determine is if we should use the marks within Debian. Let me try
Good. This was not obvious at all by reading your precedent postings.

> another example. If, say, the Apache Foundation came to us and said,
> "Sure the code is free, but that's our trademark you're using. It will
> cost you $5000 a year to use that trademark in Debian". Now we could
> easily afford this as a project, would we do it? I don't think we
> would do it, even though we could because a strict interpretation of
> the DFSG says trademarks don't matter.
We would quickly tell them to FOAD, because it's a request that
everybody would agree is unreasonable.

> The point I'm trying to make is that clearly not all trademark terms
> are reasonable.
Sure. And the point most people here are trying to make is that they
consider the MF demands reasonable and acceptable for Debian.

Now that we agreed that trademarks are not forbidden by the DFSG, if you
really feel strongly about the need for users of a totally unrestricted
firefox package, why don't you build it as well? Then users and custom
distributions would be able to choose the one which better suits their


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: