Is there a reason that the icons at http://grayrest.com/moz/resources/icons.shtml (other than the red dino head one..) cant be brought into the tree as is and used to replace the ugly blue thing (on windows) or whatever it is on linux & mac? They look much better than the current icons and would even look better than the "red dino" idea that is mentioned in various places. They also remind me of the icons for the 4.x versions of netscape (like the browser window icon with the ships wheel)
Unlike the other suggestion of using the red dino head as a generic icon (which has the problem mentioned in the appropriate bug where it cant be checked into the tree without causing trademark/trade dress problems for mozilla.org or whatever), these icons (except the dino head one) dont appear to use anything thats (C) or TM mozilla.org. Also, since these are clearly created for mozilla specificly, one can assume (in absence of any other licence text anywhere on any of the pages or in any of the zips that goe with these icons or anything said by the creators of these wonderfull icons) untill told otherwise by the creators of these icons that they are happy for these icons to be used in mozilla and for them to be checked into the tree to replace the existing icons (and therefore be covered under the mozilla tripple licence setup). Here are the reasons I can think of that may be why they are not using these: 1.mozilla.org/the mozilla team think that the icons are not sutable or think that the proposal to use the red dino as an icon is better or that there is some better icon generally. 2.the icons (other than the red dino head one) still infringe on the (C) or TM of mozilla.org (e.g. the use of the little M in the corner of all icons) 3.there is a total artwork freeze in effect for some reason (if so, why) 4.the icons infringe on (C) or TM of other companies somehow (if so, what do they infringe on) 5.there has been something said somewhere that I havent seen from the creators of these icons that prevents their use at this time (if so, where has it been said) 6.even though these icons are (as far as I can tell) not affected by the copyright/trademark issues that the red dino idea is, mozilla.org and the dev team still need to talk to the lawyers about it for some reason (if so, why) 7.the icons cant go in untill bug 29856 has been fixed (something to do with not being able to tell the difference programmaticly between different windows under *nix) because this prevents using different icons for the different windows under *nix) 8.if these icons go into the tree then they will likely be associated with "mozilla the browser" and "the mozilla project" and whatever (same as how people will associate the netscape "N" or the IE "e" or the little "windows thingo" that appears next to the start button or the apple "apple with byte taken out" or whatever other icon with whatever program it goes with). If checked into the tree now, they will go in under the tripple license scheme. Therefore, these icons will be usable under the terms of the GPL, LGPL or MPL. If this is possible, someone will be able to use these icons for something totally unrelated to mozilla.org, mozilla, the mozilla project etc. People that see this unrelated thing could mistake it as being somehow related to mozilla because its using icons legally taken from mozilla. Therefore, regardless of what the creator of whatever icons eventually get used (be they these ones or other ones) says, any icon(s) that get used for mozilla thats intended to be a "permanent solution" must be checked in under a license that prevents said icon(s) from being used for something unrelated to mozilla. 9.the icons are going in but not untill 1.0 is branched (if so, why, given that these icons wont break anything) 10.some other reason, e.g. another bug that needs to be fixed first (if so, what is that reason)
