Re: trademarks [was: xulrunner 2.0 in rawhide (F15) bundles several system libs]
On Wed, Oct 13, 2010 at 6:11 PM, Kevin Kofler kevin.kof...@chello.at wrote: Brandon Lozza wrote: I think an exception should be made for Chromium too. No. Just no. The exceptions for Firefox need to stop NOW, i.e. no new ones should be granted and the ones that have already been granted repealed/discontinued. Giving yet another package a free pass is going in the entirely wrong direction. (That said, I really don't see why Firefox gets a free pass while Chromium doesn't.) Having a more secure browser would benefit the main repositories. We already have Konqueror which is more secure than either Firefox or Chromium. (There have been much fewer security vulnerabilities in KHTML than either Gecko or WebKit. All the WebKit issues have been checked for reproducibility in KHTML and most weren't reproducible.) Kevin Kofler -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Perhaps the Upstream we should be working with instead should be Debian (Iceweasel)? I'm compiling Iceweasel right now and i'm going to attempt to plug it into the system xulrunner, lol. It's the same version anyways so I don't see why the branding being changed will introduce new bugs and I'm not using debians security patches. I'll update on this and if it works i'll look into modifying the firefox spec to use this instead. However i'm kind of a noob at packaging and probably can't maintain this forever. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: trademarks [was: xulrunner 2.0 in rawhide (F15) bundles several system libs]
Tomas Mraz wrote: The problem here really is that some not so important? projects are forced to accept all the restrictions and requirements and other more important? projects get a free pass from them. This is unfortunate and it does not improve the spirit of the package maintainers. Yes, this is the outrageous part! Mozilla should be held by the same guidelines as all the other packages in Fedora. Kevin Kofler -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: trademarks [was: xulrunner 2.0 in rawhide (F15) bundles several system libs]
Nathaniel McCallum wrote: I don't see any conflict between Fedora's policy and Mozilla's policy. Both say that if you redistribute and change code you have to re-trademark. Those policies are fair and sensible. We can either patch and re-trademark Firefox or ship upstream. One of the values of Fedora is stay close to upstream. Another value is the Firefox brand. This is a no-brainer choice for Fedora: ship upstream Firefox. I really can't believe this thread is as long as it is. It's not a no-brainer at all, because, as you say: The only possible room for debate that I see is that there is, in Firefox, a potential conflict between our ship upstream and don't bundle libs values. We have FESco to sort that out. and because that's a MUST policy whereas staying close to upstream is a SHOULD. So IMHO the no-brainer is that the MUST policy has to be followed and that Firefox must be rebranded if that's the only way to follow it. Kevin Kofler -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: trademarks [was: xulrunner 2.0 in rawhide (F15) bundles several system libs]
Brandon Lozza wrote: I think an exception should be made for Chromium too. No. Just no. The exceptions for Firefox need to stop NOW, i.e. no new ones should be granted and the ones that have already been granted repealed/discontinued. Giving yet another package a free pass is going in the entirely wrong direction. (That said, I really don't see why Firefox gets a free pass while Chromium doesn't.) Having a more secure browser would benefit the main repositories. We already have Konqueror which is more secure than either Firefox or Chromium. (There have been much fewer security vulnerabilities in KHTML than either Gecko or WebKit. All the WebKit issues have been checked for reproducibility in KHTML and most weren't reproducible.) Kevin Kofler -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: trademarks [was: xulrunner 2.0 in rawhide (F15) bundles several system libs]
On 10/6/10, Adam Williamson awill...@redhat.com wrote: On Wed, 2010-10-06 at 16:41 +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote: However, this here is Fedora, a project that once was aiming at Freedom - As trivial as it is, restrictive trademark policies simply do not fit into this philosophy. If we don't protect the Fedora trademark, anyone can produce anything and call it 'Fedora'. Including something which doesn't fit into our philosophy of freedom at all. It's really pretty simple: we can only define goals and values and blahblah for 'the Fedora project' as long as we actually retain control over 'the Fedora project' (that's we as in the Fedora community, not Red Hat, BTW) and we can only do that if we control the name 'Fedora'. If anyone can make anything and call it 'Fedora', how are people to know what comes from the Fedora project and is backed by its values, and what doesn't? -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedoraproject DOT org http://www.happyassassin.net -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel What are you guys going to do if someone does it anyway in a country where Redhat hasn't registered the Fedora trademark, or countries where another country already owns the Fedora trademark. Do you think spammers are going to host in the good old US of A? Bad argument. Strawman arguments make bad policy change decisions. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: trademarks [was: xulrunner 2.0 in rawhide (F15) bundles several system libs]
I think an exception should be made for Chromium too. Having a more secure browser would benefit the main repositories. On 10/7/10, Brandon Lozza bran...@pwnage.ca wrote: On 10/6/10, Adam Williamson awill...@redhat.com wrote: On Wed, 2010-10-06 at 16:41 +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote: However, this here is Fedora, a project that once was aiming at Freedom - As trivial as it is, restrictive trademark policies simply do not fit into this philosophy. If we don't protect the Fedora trademark, anyone can produce anything and call it 'Fedora'. Including something which doesn't fit into our philosophy of freedom at all. It's really pretty simple: we can only define goals and values and blahblah for 'the Fedora project' as long as we actually retain control over 'the Fedora project' (that's we as in the Fedora community, not Red Hat, BTW) and we can only do that if we control the name 'Fedora'. If anyone can make anything and call it 'Fedora', how are people to know what comes from the Fedora project and is backed by its values, and what doesn't? -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedoraproject DOT org http://www.happyassassin.net -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel What are you guys going to do if someone does it anyway in a country where Redhat hasn't registered the Fedora trademark, or countries where another country already owns the Fedora trademark. Do you think spammers are going to host in the good old US of A? Bad argument. Strawman arguments make bad policy change decisions. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: trademarks [was: xulrunner 2.0 in rawhide (F15) bundles several system libs]
On 10/07/2010 08:36 AM, Brandon Lozza wrote: On 10/6/10, Adam Williamsonawill...@redhat.com wrote: If we don't protect the Fedora trademark, anyone can produce anything and call it 'Fedora'. Including something which doesn't fit into our philosophy of freedom at all. What are you guys going to do if someone does it anyway in a country where Redhat hasn't registered the Fedora trademark, or countries where another country already owns the Fedora trademark. Do you think spammers are going to host in the good old US of A? Bad argument. OK, so someone can fool the Elbonians with a bad Fedora distribution. The bad guys will not be able to peddle it anywhere else, because the trademark will protect it, so the majority of Fedora users will be safe from this scam. The system works. Strawman arguments make bad policy change decisions. Indeed. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: trademarks [was: xulrunner 2.0 in rawhide (F15) bundles several system libs]
On Thu, 2010-10-07 at 08:36 -0400, Brandon Lozza wrote: What are you guys going to do if someone does it anyway in a country where Redhat hasn't registered the Fedora trademark, or countries where another country already owns the Fedora trademark. Do you think spammers are going to host in the good old US of A? Bad argument. Register the trademark there, or do something about it in the US if they distribute whatever it is they're distributing there. Strawman arguments make bad policy change decisions. Er, change? Nothing's changing. The Fedora trademark and the policy on using it has been in place for years. You're the one trying to change things. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedoraproject DOT org http://www.happyassassin.net -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: trademarks [was: xulrunner 2.0 in rawhide (F15) bundles several system libs]
On 10/06/2010 04:08 PM, Michal Schmidt wrote: On Wed, 06 Oct 2010 15:26:59 +0200 Ralf Corsepius wrote: On 10/06/2010 02:49 PM, Matej Cepl wrote: Nonsense, trademarks exists to protect users and to avoid living off somebody else brand recognition. I disagree - trademarks exist to protect the manufacturer from loosing profits because of their products being copied. Ask Adidas or Nike why they sue Chinese manufacturers and you'll see. They'll tell you that they loose money because of being copied. Of course. But there's in fact no disagreement, only looking at different aspects of the same thing. Why do you think the copying takes place? Because the companies have built a good reputation and brand, allowing them to increase profit. Good quality = good reputation = solid brand = better profits. I am not disagreeing that restrictive trademarks, patents, restricive license etc. all make sense in the commerical world. However, this here is Fedora, a project that once was aiming at Freedom - As trivial as it is, restrictive trademark policies simply do not fit into this philosophy. Then copyists try to get better profits too without bothering to build their own good reputation, by deceiving the buyers into thinking the original company with good reputation produced their goods. I'm really quite surprised about this thread. Of all the stuff often put under the confusing term intellectual property I expected trademarks to be the least controversial. Well, my view differs: To me, restrictive trademarks are in the same league as patents and closed source. Last century's, commercial world's instruments of protectionism which contradict the philosophy behind FLOSS. It's just thanks to the fact restrictive prosecution of trademarks are rare in the FLOSS world, which has caused it to get away more or less unattended. Ralf -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: trademarks [was: xulrunner 2.0 in rawhide (F15) bundles several system libs]
On Wed, 2010-10-06 at 16:41 +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote: On 10/06/2010 04:08 PM, Michal Schmidt wrote: On Wed, 06 Oct 2010 15:26:59 +0200 Ralf Corsepius wrote: On 10/06/2010 02:49 PM, Matej Cepl wrote: Nonsense, trademarks exists to protect users and to avoid living off somebody else brand recognition. I disagree - trademarks exist to protect the manufacturer from loosing profits because of their products being copied. Ask Adidas or Nike why they sue Chinese manufacturers and you'll see. They'll tell you that they loose money because of being copied. Of course. But there's in fact no disagreement, only looking at different aspects of the same thing. Why do you think the copying takes place? Because the companies have built a good reputation and brand, allowing them to increase profit. Good quality = good reputation = solid brand = better profits. I am not disagreeing that restrictive trademarks, patents, restricive license etc. all make sense in the commerical world. However, this here is Fedora, a project that once was aiming at Freedom - As trivial as it is, restrictive trademark policies simply do not fit into this philosophy. I give +1 to this. On the other hand Fedora also is (was?) a project where individual package maintainers had the biggest influence on what packages ship if they do not cross some fundamental legal limits. This changed in many ways recently and the restrictions and requirements are more and more technical, not just legal, and even controversial. The problem here really is that some not so important? projects are forced to accept all the restrictions and requirements and other more important? projects get a free pass from them. This is unfortunate and it does not improve the spirit of the package maintainers. -- Tomas Mraz No matter how far down the wrong road you've gone, turn back. Turkish proverb -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: trademarks [was: xulrunner 2.0 in rawhide (F15) bundles several system libs]
On 10/06/2010 10:41 AM, Ralf Corsepius wrote: On 10/06/2010 04:08 PM, Michal Schmidt wrote: On Wed, 06 Oct 2010 15:26:59 +0200 Ralf Corsepius wrote: On 10/06/2010 02:49 PM, Matej Cepl wrote: Nonsense, trademarks exists to protect users and to avoid living off somebody else brand recognition. I disagree - trademarks exist to protect the manufacturer from loosing profits because of their products being copied. Ask Adidas or Nike why they sue Chinese manufacturers and you'll see. They'll tell you that they loose money because of being copied. Of course. But there's in fact no disagreement, only looking at different aspects of the same thing. Why do you think the copying takes place? Because the companies have built a good reputation and brand, allowing them to increase profit. Good quality = good reputation = solid brand = better profits. I am not disagreeing that restrictive trademarks, patents, restricive license etc. all make sense in the commerical world. However, this here is Fedora, a project that once was aiming at Freedom - As trivial as it is, restrictive trademark policies simply do not fit into this philosophy. Then copyists try to get better profits too without bothering to build their own good reputation, by deceiving the buyers into thinking the original company with good reputation produced their goods. I'm really quite surprised about this thread. Of all the stuff often put under the confusing term intellectual property I expected trademarks to be the least controversial. Well, my view differs: To me, restrictive trademarks are in the same league as patents and closed source. Last century's, commercial world's instruments of protectionism which contradict the philosophy behind FLOSS. It's just thanks to the fact restrictive prosecution of trademarks are rare in the FLOSS world, which has caused it to get away more or less unattended. I have an idea... I'm going to create a fork of Fedora. I'm going to fill it full of proprietary shit. I'm going to find the buggiest closed drivers I can find and load them into the kernel. I'll also make it so that you have to type in your credit card number just to login. I'll register a fedora derivative domain name and SEO the hell out of it. Then, I'll tell people my distro is called Fedora Ultimate Edition. Everyone will believe me because I'll leave all the Fedora artwork in place. I'll also publish is under the pseudonym of Ralf Corsepius: Ralf Corsepius' Fedora Ultimate Edition. Doing this harms real people and a real organization. The freedom to do this is not freedom at all but lunacy. Its quite simple. You're free use my work however you like, even for evil. But you are not allowed to claim you are me. Fedora and Mozilla go way beyond this. They give you the FREEDOM to call yourself Fedora and/or Mozilla so long as the work actually represents them. That is where the freedom is found: freedom with conditions. Just like every single Free/Open license: freedom with conditions. The default state of copyright is that you have few freedoms. Copyleft works by granting you additional freedoms so long as your exercise of those freedoms don't damage anyone else's use of those freedoms. The trademark grants of Fedora and Mozilla work the same way: you can use the trademark so long as your use of the trademark doesn't impede on anyone else's use of the trademark (including the original author). Thus, your argument actually undoes the entire power of the GPL. Nathaniel -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: trademarks [was: xulrunner 2.0 in rawhide (F15) bundles several system libs]
On Wed, 2010-10-06 at 16:41 +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote: However, this here is Fedora, a project that once was aiming at Freedom - As trivial as it is, restrictive trademark policies simply do not fit into this philosophy. If we don't protect the Fedora trademark, anyone can produce anything and call it 'Fedora'. Including something which doesn't fit into our philosophy of freedom at all. It's really pretty simple: we can only define goals and values and blahblah for 'the Fedora project' as long as we actually retain control over 'the Fedora project' (that's we as in the Fedora community, not Red Hat, BTW) and we can only do that if we control the name 'Fedora'. If anyone can make anything and call it 'Fedora', how are people to know what comes from the Fedora project and is backed by its values, and what doesn't? -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedoraproject DOT org http://www.happyassassin.net -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: trademarks [was: xulrunner 2.0 in rawhide (F15) bundles several system libs]
On Wed, Oct 06, 2010 at 10:59:08 -0400, Nathaniel McCallum nathan...@natemccallum.com wrote: I have an idea... I'm going to create a fork of Fedora. I'm going to fill it full of proprietary shit. I'm going to find the buggiest closed drivers I can find and load them into the kernel. I'll also make it so that you have to type in your credit card number just to login. I'll register a fedora derivative domain name and SEO the hell out of it. Then, I'll tell people my distro is called Fedora Ultimate Edition. Everyone will believe me because I'll leave all the Fedora artwork in place. I'll also publish is under the pseudonym of Ralf Corsepius: Ralf Corsepius' Fedora Ultimate Edition. The Fedora project goes pretty far in making it easy to produce an unbranded version of Fedora for people that want to do that. The trademark protected stuff is supposed to be in just a few packages that have alternative packages in the distro already, that can replace them. I think that makes a point that Fedora isn't trying to abuse trademarks to keep supposedly open source closed. I don't think Mozilla is trying to abuse their trademarks either (though there have been open source projects that have). I don't think they go as far as fedora in making it easy to make a rebranded application, but they certainly don't make it very difficult either as there is an Iceweasel out there. The issue seems to be that Mozilla's policies for their brand conflict with Fedora's policies for their brand and that Fedora has limited resources. I don't think anyone is being evil here. There are reasonable positions on both sides of the argument. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: trademarks [was: xulrunner 2.0 in rawhide (F15) bundles several system libs]
On 10/06/2010 12:12 PM, Bruno Wolff III wrote: On Wed, Oct 06, 2010 at 10:59:08 -0400, Nathaniel McCallum nathan...@natemccallum.com wrote: I have an idea... I'm going to create a fork of Fedora. I'm going to fill it full of proprietary shit. I'm going to find the buggiest closed drivers I can find and load them into the kernel. I'll also make it so that you have to type in your credit card number just to login. I'll register a fedora derivative domain name and SEO the hell out of it. Then, I'll tell people my distro is called Fedora Ultimate Edition. Everyone will believe me because I'll leave all the Fedora artwork in place. I'll also publish is under the pseudonym of Ralf Corsepius: Ralf Corsepius' Fedora Ultimate Edition. The Fedora project goes pretty far in making it easy to produce an unbranded version of Fedora for people that want to do that. The trademark protected stuff is supposed to be in just a few packages that have alternative packages in the distro already, that can replace them. I think that makes a point that Fedora isn't trying to abuse trademarks to keep supposedly open source closed. I don't think Mozilla is trying to abuse their trademarks either (though there have been open source projects that have). I don't think they go as far as fedora in making it easy to make a rebranded application, but they certainly don't make it very difficult either as there is an Iceweasel out there. The issue seems to be that Mozilla's policies for their brand conflict with Fedora's policies for their brand and that Fedora has limited resources. I don't think anyone is being evil here. There are reasonable positions on both sides of the argument. Agreed, I'm just trying to point out the absurdity of saying that any restriction on trademark impedes the freedoms of the GPL (etc...). My point is that it is precisely the limitations that guarantee those freedoms. I don't see any conflict between Fedora's policy and Mozilla's policy. Both say that if you redistribute and change code you have to re-trademark. Those policies are fair and sensible. We can either patch and re-trademark Firefox or ship upstream. One of the values of Fedora is stay close to upstream. Another value is the Firefox brand. This is a no-brainer choice for Fedora: ship upstream Firefox. I really can't believe this thread is as long as it is. The only possible room for debate that I see is that there is, in Firefox, a potential conflict between our ship upstream and don't bundle libs values. We have FESco to sort that out. In short: No big deal. Close the thread. Move on. ;) Nathaniel -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: trademarks [was: xulrunner 2.0 in rawhide (F15) bundles several system libs]
On Wed, Oct 06, 2010 at 12:29:59 -0400, Nathaniel McCallum nathan...@natemccallum.com wrote: The only possible room for debate that I see is that there is, in Firefox, a potential conflict between our ship upstream and don't bundle libs values. We have FESco to sort that out. Those are the policies I was refering to. In short: No big deal. Close the thread. Move on. ;) Well the project doesn't seem to be coming to consensus on this issue. Some of us feel that we should provide an Iceweasel or drop Firefox, similar to other things the project has decided to not package. Others think that Firefox is so important to the project, that we must make an exception for it. (And to some extent, that we should stay close to upstream.) Some have also hoped that Mozilla would change with regard to bundled libraries in the near future, but that seems pretty unlikely. I don't think this is just a FESCO issue. I really think this is a board issue as it has to do with the relative importance of our bundled libraries policy, our stay close to upstream policies, the impact on our user base of replaceing Firefox with an unbranded version or just dropping it and the morale of various developers if we give or don't give Firefox an exemption to the no bundled libraries policies. For example it may be that we can't do an Iceweasel, because the current packagers of Firefox may refuse to do that as an alterative to packaging Firefox and we may not find new volunteers to do the packaging work. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: trademarks [was: xulrunner 2.0 in rawhide (F15) bundles several system libs]
Once upon a time, Bruno Wolff III br...@wolff.to said: Some have also hoped that Mozilla would change with regard to bundled libraries in the near future, but that seems pretty unlikely. I think that's an unfair statement; from what I understand, Firefox has already unbundled some libraries, and said they will unbundle others once their changes settle down. -- Chris Adams cmad...@hiwaay.net Systems and Network Administrator - HiWAAY Internet Services I don't speak for anybody but myself - that's enough trouble. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: trademarks [was: xulrunner 2.0 in rawhide (F15) bundles several system libs]
On Wed, Oct 06, 2010 at 12:25:27 -0500, Chris Adams cmad...@hiwaay.net wrote: Once upon a time, Bruno Wolff III br...@wolff.to said: Some have also hoped that Mozilla would change with regard to bundled libraries in the near future, but that seems pretty unlikely. I think that's an unfair statement; from what I understand, Firefox has already unbundled some libraries, and said they will unbundle others once their changes settle down. I guess that depends on what one means by near and unbundled libraries. I got the impression that the vpx stuff was months away from being unbundled. And there is no apparent commitment not to bundle new libraries going forward. So that there will need to be an ongoing exception to cover any new libraries that get used by Firefox. It does seem that specific libraries do end up getting unbundled in most cases eventually. However at least one library is likely to be a long term fork because Mozilla and upstream disagree on the feature added to the Mozilla version of the library. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: trademarks [was: xulrunner 2.0 in rawhide (F15) bundles several system libs]
Adam Williamson awilliam at redhat.com writes: It's really pretty simple: we can only define goals and values and blahblah for 'the Fedora project' as long as we actually retain control over 'the Fedora project' (that's we as in the Fedora community, not Red Hat, BTW) and we can only do that if we control the name 'Fedora'. If anyone can make anything and call it 'Fedora', how are people to know what comes from the Fedora project and is backed by its values, and what doesn't? Well, I suppose digital signatures would make this possible - but given that most people don't know how to use them, and the availability of an infinite number of free names to choose from, I think trademark restrictions are reasonable. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: trademarks [was: xulrunner 2.0 in rawhide (F15) bundles several system libs]
On Wed, Oct 6, 2010 at 10:08 AM, Michal Schmidt mschm...@redhat.com wrote: [snip] Of course. But there's in fact no disagreement, only looking at different aspects of the same thing. Why do you think the copying takes place? Because the companies have built a good reputation and brand, allowing them to increase profit. Good quality = good reputation = solid brand = better profits. Then copyists try to get better profits too without bothering to build their own good reputation, by deceiving the buyers into thinking the original company with good reputation produced their goods. I'm really quite surprised about this thread. Of all the stuff often put under the confusing term intellectual property I expected trademarks to be the least controversial. Exactly. I often describe trademarks as a kind of consumer protection law— but instead of using the blunt tool of government driven enforcement it relies on the existence of an interested party (the trademark holder) to provide the protection at their own expense with enforcement via civil law. This has advantages (it's very flexible, enforcement can be made to match the need, the public doesn't need to pay for it directly) and disadvantages (it suffers if the interested party is either not interested enough or too interested), but regardless it's pretty much something categorically different from, say, patents... which have no consumer-protective properties and which are very difficult to escape (compared to changing a package name/branding). -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: trademarks [was: xulrunner 2.0 in rawhide (F15) bundles several system libs]
On Thu, Oct 07, 2010 at 02:00:50PM +1000, Brendan Jones wrote: On 10/07/2010 12:10 PM, Toshio Kuratomi wrote: But I agree that having a strict requirement because it's felt that the issues that are raised by allowing the requirement to be violated are very problematic for us as a distro but then letting certain things bundle because they're more important than other packages is morale sapping. Fesco is voting in the trac ticket on whether to allow libvpx to be bundled and also whether to allow bundling of any library that mozilla decides to in the future; I think if that passes the FPC will have to look at making it easier for other packages to do the same. -Toshio Surely its the users choice. I hate the fact that a distro feels the need to align itself with one or the other - there are plenty alternatives out there (which aren't chromium) that do the job. Let's support these or stop whinging and fork firefox. Uh. I'm talking purely about bundled libs here which are a distro/maintainer/packager issue much more than a user issue. It becomes a user issue if the distro can't do it's job and keep all of the bundled libraries up to date and the user is forced to circumvent the distro packaging. Trademarks may be more about users butthat's not what I'm talking about here at all. -Toshio pgpSnjbKmCiy3.pgp Description: PGP signature -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
