MJ Ray wrote:
Nick Phillips <nwp@nz.lemon-computing.com> wrote:It would seem to me that if you want to distribute a version of mozilla with a different default search, then it is reasonable to require that you do not call it mozilla or use any of their trademarks.I can understand why I can't call it mozilla, because that's their name. They are not called firefox though. They make a thing called "Mozilla Firefox" and are claiming "Firefox" as an extra name.
Er, that's what a trademark is :-) Nabisco isn't called Oreo, but Oreo is still their trademark.
On a purely pragmatic note, if it's fine to require the name is changed for modified versions (like Debian's can be), it's not clear how todo that at present - do we know if it is even possible?
Read back in the various threads on this topic - I've been explaining how it's done.
It feels like Mozilla may be free but vexatious. Unsurprisingly, I'm a little grumpy atthem claiming they are behaving well while making more work for us.
I apologise that our trademark policy makes more work for you, but I do think we are behaving well in that all of our software is still Free.
Then there are the claims that X or Y from MF will discuss it, even though past attempts failed and it seems nothing has changed on MF's side.
I'm here and I'm not going away. Gerv