Re: firefox -> iceweasel package is probably not legal
On Wed, Dec 06, 2006 at 11:37:42AM -0800, Sean Kellogg <skellogg@u.washington.edu> wrote:
> On Wednesday 06 December 2006 07:42, Andreas Barth wrote:
> > * Arnoud Engelfriet (arnoud@engelfriet.net) [061206 16:26]:
> > > What I don't understand is why a package for the Iceweasel software
> > > would carry the name firefox.
> >
> > It doesn't do that. All what we do is saying people who had previously
> > installed firefox that we rather recommend them now to use iceweasel.
> > That is a normal thing to do if a package changed name. The same happens
> > with people who used to use kernel-image-* - these packages are renamed
> > to linux-image-* now.
>
> There is, of course, a critical difference for this name change. Debian
> changed the name not for technical reasons (as I believe was the motivation
> behind kernel -> linux) but for trademark reasons. Debian no longer ships
> Firefox (TM) because it is not authorized to do so... and yet it continues
> to ship firefox?
Actually, what Mozilla asked us was not to use the Firefox name with the
logo they provide as a replacement for their trademarked logo.
Also note that if you use upstream source tarballs and do normal builds
(without enabling "official branding"), you get something that looks
like firefox, smells like firefox, acts like firefox, but that doesn't
have the firefox logo, that is named bon echo, and that doesn't have
talkback. And guess what ? the binary is still called firefox.
Mike
Reply to: