Re: Firefox/Iceweasel in OpenBSD

[Henrik Enberg]

> Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2006 11:11:52 -0400
> From: Kurt Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> 
> On Thursday 12 October 2006 10:13 am, Tobias Ulmer wrote:
> > We are modifying the source code, which is ok with the "porting
> > software" paragraph in the document above, but contradicts with a
> > private mail from Mike Connor where he writes about patching of
> > app source violates their trademark. Oh well...
> 
> Yes they are trying to exert a ridiculous level of control with
> their trademark but only when using the official branding.
> If they have given a project permission to use the official
> branding then any patch to firefox must first be approved
> by them.
> 
> That's what all the fus is about. I'm not happy about it but
> it doesn't affect our ability to distribute it under the
> community edition rules.

Actually, what the Mozilla people objected to in the whole Debian
debacle seems to be that the package was called ;firefox+.  Debian
already used the community edition version just like OpenBSD does.

Re: Firefox/Iceweasel in OpenBSD

[Lars Hansson]

On Friday 13 October 2006 04:25, Constantine A. Murenin wrote:
> Precisely which parts of the community-edition guidelines are you so
> strongly defending?

He is defending it? I could have sworn he only said OpenBSD is complying with 
the guidelines.

---
Lars Hansson

Re: Firefox/Iceweasel in OpenBSD

[Constantine A. Murenin]

On 12/10/06, Kurt Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

... > http://www.mozilla.org/foundation/trademarks/community-edition-policy.html

OpenBSD is complying with the published guidelines for
the community edition. That is the only point that matters.
If the Mozilla Foundation thinks differently, I'm sure they
will contact us.


Kurt,

Precisely which parts of the community-edition guidelines are you so
strongly defending?

Maybe this one:


If an individual or organization is creating a Community Edition of Mozilla Firefox or Thunderbird, 
it must use the names "Firefox Community Edition" or "Thunderbird Community 
Edition" to identify this software.


Cheers,
Constantine.

Re: Firefox/Iceweasel in OpenBSD

[Kurt Miller]

Henrik Enberg wrote:

Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2006 11:11:52 -0400
From: Kurt Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

On Thursday 12 October 2006 10:13 am, Tobias Ulmer wrote:


We are modifying the source code, which is ok with the "porting
software" paragraph in the document above, but contradicts with a
private mail from Mike Connor where he writes about patching of
app source violates their trademark. Oh well...
  

Yes they are trying to exert a ridiculous level of control with
their trademark but only when using the official branding.
If they have given a project permission to use the official
branding then any patch to firefox must first be approved
by them.

That's what all the fus is about. I'm not happy about it but
it doesn't affect our ability to distribute it under the
community edition rules.



Actually, what the Mozilla people objected to in the whole Debian
debacle seems to be that the package was called ;firefox+.


I don't agree with your interpretation of the bug report.


Debian
already used the community edition version just like OpenBSD does.


  


Again this is not the way I understand it. What happened there
is not our concern or a topic for this list. They did things
differently then we have.

OpenBSD is complying with the published guidelines for
the community edition. That is the only point that matters.
If the Mozilla Foundation thinks differently, I'm sure they
will contact us.

-Kurt

Re: Firefox/Iceweasel in OpenBSD

[Kurt Miller]

On Thursday 12 October 2006 10:13 am, Tobias Ulmer wrote:
> We are modifying the source code, which is ok with the "porting
> software" paragraph in the document above, but contradicts with a
> private mail from Mike Connor where he writes about patching of
> app source violates their trademark. Oh well...

Yes they are trying to exert a ridiculous level of control with
their trademark but only when using the official branding.
If they have given a project permission to use the official
branding then any patch to firefox must first be approved
by them.

That's what all the fus is about. I'm not happy about it but
it doesn't affect our ability to distribute it under the
community edition rules.

-Kurt

Re: Firefox/Iceweasel in OpenBSD

[Constantine A. Murenin]

On 12/10/06, RedShift <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

David Sampson wrote:
> Due to the recent flair over the use of the Firefox logo, the GNU camp
> has decided to fork the entire project, into IceWeasel.  The idea here
> is that they can't use the FF logo freely, so of course they must fork
> it.  I just want to know how this is going to affect the OpenBSD camp,
> if at all.

Actually I quickly read the license file included with the source
distribution of firefox, and found no reason why the logo/name can't be
used in custom builds. I'm no license expert, but does anyone have a
clue how mozilla decided that builds other than those from mozilla can't
use the name/logo?

Imho that was a pretty stupid decision by the mozilla team, things like
names and logos are one of the most important aspects in marketing. It
would be foolish to wreck it.


For those interested, Theo already discussed the problem in 2004-03:
   http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=openbsd-misc&m=107949032018172&w=2


Finally, how do the mozilla developers feel about this? Do they agree
with this "management decision"?


It's hard to say. A lot of people disagreed with the "throwing away"
of the Application Suite, including some core layout developers, but
MoFo didn't really listen. So it's not like it's Gecko developers that
decide these kind of issues at MoFo / Mozilla Corporation...

Cheers,
Constantine.

Re: Firefox/Iceweasel in OpenBSD

[Tobias Ulmer]

On Thu, Oct 12, 2006 at 09:07:13AM -0400, Kurt Miller wrote:
> On Thursday 12 October 2006 4:57 am, Tobias Ulmer wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 11, 2006 at 10:19:45PM -0700, Ted Unangst wrote:
> > > On 10/11/06, David Sampson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > >AFAIK, no, but I was hoping to glean that information from the list...
> > > >
> > > >On Wed, 2006-10-11 at 23:31 -0500, Sam Fourman Jr. wrote:
> > > >> is someone planning on making a OpenBSD port for IceWeasel?
> > > 
> > > and the point would be?  what makes iceweasel a better browser than 
> > > firefox?
> > > 
> > >
> > 
> > It's a legal issue. I've asked Mike Connor recently about the trademark
> > problems and his answers were quite clear to me (applies to unofficial
> > builds):
> > 
> > - Currently mozilla takes no actions against the "firefox" executable
> >   or package name (because applications depend on the name), however
> >   it's not legal.
> > 
> > - 'Firefox(r)' Community Edition is a trademark of mozilla. Its
> >   use is tolerated as long as we don't modify "firefox" too much (as 
> >   outlined in [1] under "Community Releases").
> > 
> > Afaik our packages are not legal unless we have a secret partnership
> > with mozilla. [2] links to all releveant documents.
> 
> Did you intentionally leave out the document that describes
> "Community Editions"?
> 
> "Porting the software to different operating systems" is
> specifically allowed in the Community Edition Policy:
> 
> http://www.mozilla.org/foundation/trademarks/community-edition-policy.html
> 

No, i didn't know this document.

> Declaring our port is not legal without details is irresponsible
> and informatory. Please state specifically what part of their
> policy we are violating.
> 

I put 'afaik' there, because it was my information status
until i've seen the document above.

We are modifying the source code, which is ok with the "porting
software" paragraph in the document above, but contradicts with a
private mail from Mike Connor where he writes about patching of
app source violates their trademark. Oh well...

Tobias

> > 
> > Personally i would like to see the same strict policy we use against
> > vendors like Intel, Mavell etc applied to Mozilla, but thats just me
> > (yes i know, base != ports).
> > 
> > Tobias
> > 
> > [1] http://www.mozilla.org/foundation/trademarks/l10n-policy.html
> > [2] http://www.mozilla.org/foundation/trademarks/index.html

Re: Firefox/Iceweasel in OpenBSD

[Tim Donahue]

On Thu, 12 Oct 2006 12:32:08 +0200
RedShift <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> David Sampson wrote:
> > Due to the recent flair over the use of the Firefox logo, the GNU
> > camp has decided to fork the entire project, into IceWeasel.  The
> > idea here is that they can't use the FF logo freely, so of course
> > they must fork it.  I just want to know how this is going to affect
> > the OpenBSD camp, if at all.  
> > 
> > David Sampson
> > 
> > 
> > 
> 
> Actually I quickly read the license file included with the source 
> distribution of firefox, and found no reason why the logo/name can't
> be used in custom builds. I'm no license expert, but does anyone have
> a clue how mozilla decided that builds other than those from mozilla
> can't use the name/logo?
> 
> Imho that was a pretty stupid decision by the mozilla team, things
> like names and logos are one of the most important aspects in
> marketing. It would be foolish to wreck it.
> 
> Finally, how do the mozilla developers feel about this? Do they agree 
> with this "management decision"?
> 
> Glenn
> 


This is a trademark issue and from what I hear the Mozilla guys guard
their trademarks "vigorously.  This probably stems from the fact that
they have been bitten 1 or 2 times in the past with trademark issues
and don't want to go through that again.

Tim Donahue

Re: Firefox/Iceweasel in OpenBSD

[Kurt Miller]

On Wednesday 11 October 2006 10:31 pm, David Sampson wrote:
> Due to the recent flair over the use of the Firefox logo, the GNU camp
> has decided to fork the entire project, into IceWeasel.  The idea here
> is that they can't use the FF logo freely, so of course they must fork
> it.  I just want to know how this is going to affect the OpenBSD camp,
> if at all.  

We currently distribute Firefox under their Community Edition
policy:

http://www.mozilla.org/foundation/trademarks/community-edition-policy.html

At this point in time I don't see a reason to change over
to use IceWeasel or make up our own name. Perhaps others will
have different opinions on this.

-Kurt

Re: Firefox/Iceweasel in OpenBSD

[Kurt Miller]

On Thursday 12 October 2006 4:57 am, Tobias Ulmer wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 11, 2006 at 10:19:45PM -0700, Ted Unangst wrote:
> > On 10/11/06, David Sampson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >AFAIK, no, but I was hoping to glean that information from the list...
> > >
> > >On Wed, 2006-10-11 at 23:31 -0500, Sam Fourman Jr. wrote:
> > >> is someone planning on making a OpenBSD port for IceWeasel?
> > 
> > and the point would be?  what makes iceweasel a better browser than firefox?
> > 
> >
> 
> It's a legal issue. I've asked Mike Connor recently about the trademark
> problems and his answers were quite clear to me (applies to unofficial
> builds):
> 
> - Currently mozilla takes no actions against the "firefox" executable
>   or package name (because applications depend on the name), however
>   it's not legal.
> 
> - 'Firefox(r)' Community Edition is a trademark of mozilla. Its
>   use is tolerated as long as we don't modify "firefox" too much (as 
>   outlined in [1] under "Community Releases").
> 
> Afaik our packages are not legal unless we have a secret partnership
> with mozilla. [2] links to all releveant documents.

Did you intentionally leave out the document that describes
"Community Editions"?

"Porting the software to different operating systems" is
specifically allowed in the Community Edition Policy:

http://www.mozilla.org/foundation/trademarks/community-edition-policy.html

Declaring our port is not legal without details is irresponsible
and informatory. Please state specifically what part of their
policy we are violating.

> 
> Personally i would like to see the same strict policy we use against
> vendors like Intel, Mavell etc applied to Mozilla, but thats just me
> (yes i know, base != ports).
> 
> Tobias
> 
> [1] http://www.mozilla.org/foundation/trademarks/l10n-policy.html
> [2] http://www.mozilla.org/foundation/trademarks/index.html

Re: Firefox/Iceweasel in OpenBSD

[RedShift]

David Sampson wrote:

Due to the recent flair over the use of the Firefox logo, the GNU camp
has decided to fork the entire project, into IceWeasel.  The idea here
is that they can't use the FF logo freely, so of course they must fork
it.  I just want to know how this is going to affect the OpenBSD camp,
if at all.  


David Sampson





Actually I quickly read the license file included with the source 
distribution of firefox, and found no reason why the logo/name can't be 
used in custom builds. I'm no license expert, but does anyone have a 
clue how mozilla decided that builds other than those from mozilla can't 
use the name/logo?


Imho that was a pretty stupid decision by the mozilla team, things like 
names and logos are one of the most important aspects in marketing. It 
would be foolish to wreck it.


Finally, how do the mozilla developers feel about this? Do they agree 
with this "management decision"?


Glenn

Re: Firefox/Iceweasel in OpenBSD

[Tobias Ulmer]

On Wed, Oct 11, 2006 at 10:19:45PM -0700, Ted Unangst wrote:
> On 10/11/06, David Sampson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >AFAIK, no, but I was hoping to glean that information from the list...
> >
> >On Wed, 2006-10-11 at 23:31 -0500, Sam Fourman Jr. wrote:
> >> is someone planning on making a OpenBSD port for IceWeasel?
> 
> and the point would be?  what makes iceweasel a better browser than firefox?
> 
>

It's a legal issue. I've asked Mike Connor recently about the trademark
problems and his answers were quite clear to me (applies to unofficial
builds):

- Currently mozilla takes no actions against the "firefox" executable
  or package name (because applications depend on the name), however
  it's not legal.

- 'Firefox(r)' Community Edition is a trademark of mozilla. Its
  use is tolerated as long as we don't modify "firefox" too much (as 
  outlined in [1] under "Community Releases").

Afaik our packages are not legal unless we have a secret partnership
with mozilla. [2] links to all releveant documents.

Personally i would like to see the same strict policy we use against
vendors like Intel, Mavell etc applied to Mozilla, but thats just me
(yes i know, base != ports).

Tobias

[1] http://www.mozilla.org/foundation/trademarks/l10n-policy.html
[2] http://www.mozilla.org/foundation/trademarks/index.html

Re: Firefox/Iceweasel in OpenBSD

[Ted Unangst]

On 10/11/06, David Sampson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

AFAIK, no, but I was hoping to glean that information from the list...

On Wed, 2006-10-11 at 23:31 -0500, Sam Fourman Jr. wrote:
> is someone planning on making a OpenBSD port for IceWeasel?


and the point would be?  what makes iceweasel a better browser than firefox?

Re: Firefox/Iceweasel in OpenBSD

[David Sampson]

Hrrmpf.  It seems like this goes against OpenBSD philosophy, but there
are many who know far more than I on this subject  Maybe TDR hasn't
decided/thought about it, I don't know.  I would like to continue to use
firefox under that name, and use the logo too, but it probably isn't as
simple as that.

David Sampson
dbsrolltide_at_bellsouth.net


On Thu, 2006-10-12 at 10:37 +0530, Siju George wrote:
> On 10/12/06, David Sampson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Due to the recent flair over the use of the Firefox logo, the GNU camp
> > has decided to fork the entire project, into IceWeasel.  The idea here
> > is that they can't use the FF logo freely, so of course they must fork
> > it.  I just want to know how this is going to affect the OpenBSD camp,
> > if at all.
> >
> 
> Just going through it in
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iceweasel
> 
> I found
> 
> ===
> 
> 1)
> 
> The name IceWeasel was coined to refer to Mozilla Firefox during a
> long debate within the Debian Project in 2004 and 2005. Mozilla
> enforces trademarks vigorously and claims the right to deny the use of
> the name "Firefox" to unofficial builds.
> 
> 2)
> 
> Distributions that do not have this permission must compile the
> Firefox source with an option enabled that gives Firefox a generic
> name and does not use the official logo or other artwork.
> 
> I don't know about 4.0 but in 3.9 it compiles with the name "mozilla-firefox".
> 
> Is this wrong? or did I miss something?
> 
> Thankyou so much
> 
> Kind Regards
> 
> Siju

Re: Firefox/Iceweasel in OpenBSD

[Siju George]

On 10/12/06, David Sampson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

Due to the recent flair over the use of the Firefox logo, the GNU camp
has decided to fork the entire project, into IceWeasel.  The idea here
is that they can't use the FF logo freely, so of course they must fork
it.  I just want to know how this is going to affect the OpenBSD camp,
if at all.



Just going through it in

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iceweasel

I found

===

1)

The name IceWeasel was coined to refer to Mozilla Firefox during a
long debate within the Debian Project in 2004 and 2005. Mozilla
enforces trademarks vigorously and claims the right to deny the use of
the name "Firefox" to unofficial builds.

2)

Distributions that do not have this permission must compile the
Firefox source with an option enabled that gives Firefox a generic
name and does not use the official logo or other artwork.

I don't know about 4.0 but in 3.9 it compiles with the name "mozilla-firefox".

Is this wrong? or did I miss something?

Thankyou so much

Kind Regards

Siju

Re: Firefox/Iceweasel in OpenBSD

[David Sampson]

AFAIK, no, but I was hoping to glean that information from the list...

On Wed, 2006-10-11 at 23:31 -0500, Sam Fourman Jr. wrote:
> is someone planning on making a OpenBSD port for IceWeasel?
> 
> Sam Fourman Jr.
> 
> On 10/11/06, David Sampson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Due to the recent flair over the use of the Firefox logo, the GNU camp
> > has decided to fork the entire project, into IceWeasel.  The idea here
> > is that they can't use the FF logo freely, so of course they must fork
> > it.  I just want to know how this is going to affect the OpenBSD camp,
> > if at all.
> >
> > David Sampson

Firefox/Iceweasel in OpenBSD

[David Sampson]

Due to the recent flair over the use of the Firefox logo, the GNU camp
has decided to fork the entire project, into IceWeasel.  The idea here
is that they can't use the FF logo freely, so of course they must fork
it.  I just want to know how this is going to affect the OpenBSD camp,
if at all.  

David Sampson