Re: firefox -> iceweasel package is probably not legal
Sean Kellogg writes:
> On Wednesday 06 December 2006 13:39, Michael Poole wrote:
>> Trademark law is not strictly analogous to patent or copyright law.
>>
>> Trademark law's purpose is not to encourage or reward the commercial
>> use of new marks, but to stem certain kinds of pernicious consumer
>> confusion.
>
> Yes, consumer confusion. I have suggested that debian users who do not follow
> debian-legal are confused about the relationship between iceweasel and
> firefox. I have suggested that a package firefox that installs essentially
> nothing on its own while forcing the install of iceweasel is confusing. I
> have further suggested that providing a /usr/bin/firefox
> to /usr/bin/iceweasel is confusing. Confusion abounds.
Alleged possibilities of confusion abounds. There is quite a
difference between that and actual likelihood of confusion,
particularly no one has cited any holdings that appear to be on point.
>> As it is not simply a question of owning and controlling
>> rights (for a limited period), it is incorrect to continually treat
>> trademark law like those others in hope that you will convince us
>> otherwise.
>
> That strikes me as uncalled for.
>
> Trademark law is totally different than copyright or patent law. I don't seem
> to recall saying or implying otherwise.
A few messages back, you said that "trademark law is an ongoing
discussion between two parties". This excludes the consumer from
consideration, which is in appropriate for copyright and patent law
but not trademark law.
> But I, and others on this list, have
> given numerous reasons for why the package firefox could be seen as an
> infringement of the Firefox mark... and the primary response back has
> been "it'll be hard to get debian users to learn about iceweasel if we don't
> push it on those asking for firefox."
Not at all. If there is no transition package, the user's system will
be left in a non-functioning state. The old "firefox" package will
depend on old libraries, and these will at some point (possibly now)
conflict with the new library packages needed by the rest of the
system.
> Well, excuse me, but isn't that the whole point?! Isn't that why Mozilla gave
> Debian the boot... they don't want people using the Debianized Firefox code
> and thinking it is, in fact, Firefox?! By packing iceweasel as firefox
> Debian is seeking to have its cake and eat it too.
You are making quite an unwarranted and unexplained jump here. The
entire point of the current "firefox" package is that "iceweasel" is a
distinct package. The executable now distributed by Debian presents
itself as Iceweasel when you run it. Debian is not "packing iceweasel
as firefox".
Michael Poole
Reply to: