Re: [Legal] Firefox not truly Free?
As I recall, there was language about "official builds" of Firefox.
So it wouldn't seem to be binding on us.
-- John
On Tue, Mar 01, 2005 at 10:51:04AM -0500, William Ballard wrote:
> I don't know what to make of this statement:
>
> http://news.zdnet.co.uk/0,39020330,39189475,00.htm
> [quote]
> The main disadvantage of the deal with Google is that native language
> versions of Firefox are not permitted to change the default search
> engine to one that is more useful for searching Web pages in a
> particular language.[/quote]
>
> I don't want to be a chicken little, but in what sense is this statement
> valid? It seems to have extraordinary implications, not in the least
> that Firefox and Mozilla would have to be considered Non-Free.
>
> Is it merely advistory or a request? I know there was some talk about
> Debian Thunderbird; here's some more fuel for the fire!
>
> What gives?
>
> [If this gets moved to d-l@l.d.o, cc me, b/c I'm not on that list.)
>
>
> --
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-legal-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
>
>
Reply to: