On 10/10/14 00:24, [email protected] wrote: > I'm seeking comments for proposed changes to the existing "Legal > Disclaimers and Limitations" document that exists at: > https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/about/legal/terms/mozilla/ > > It's been awhile since that document was updated. Your feedback is > appreciated. The proposed new version is here: > https://docs.google.com/a/mozilla.com/document/d/152QEtaM0wMD9oNYN8bl6k6TNRw7_ArC5_LV28YvXh1Y/edit > > The new version will go into effect on October 15, 2014.
Wow, that's a bit fast given that you only asked for feedback on October 10th :-( In particular, those who are not paid to work on Mozilla may not be able to react that fast. In general, I think this document is very clear. Which is great :-) Some particular feedback: 1) "MozillaBugzilla" is not a name we use. BMO is the normal nickname, and the title on the site (which no-one uses in discussion) is "Bugzilla@Mozilla". 2) "mozilla.org/about/legal/acceptable-us" - missing "e". 3) "The WordPress software used by certain Websites is licensed under the GPLv2 (or later). Learn more: https://wordpress.org/about/gpl/";. Why is this notice important for WordPress in particular? We use a lot of GPLed server software. Mercurial, our version control software, is but one other example. 4) "On the other hand, an open license may be inappropriate if you upload a profile picture and wish to prohibit others from using your picture." It's not quite clear how this sentence works. Does it mean "profile pictures don't have to be submitted under an open license"? Or something else? 5) Disclaimer: I know the law says this has to be prominent, but in the HTML version of the MPL 2, we got away with a coloured background: https://www.mozilla.org/MPL/2.0/ . Could we do something similar here, rather than SHOUTING? Gerv _______________________________________________ governance mailing list [email protected] https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/governance
