>Ou muda para off o item de configuração ou muda-se de distribuição. A Canonical fez uma decisão que afeta a privacidade de milhões de usuários. Se o usuário quisesse, ele instalaria. Simples assim. O "Ame-o ou deixo-o" é uma postura politicamente inábil.
>Pelo que me consta, no google, facebook e etc. é até pior. Sim, mas uma coisa são sites que você pode ou não visitar, e outra é um spyware inserido num sistema operacional GNU/Linux. Ainda há um terceiro elemento que é a utilização da lei de propriedade intelectual e representante paralegal para silenciar um crítico a política de privacidade do Ubuntu. Conforme disse anteriormente, vale ler o post do Micah Lee explicando a história. On Fri, Nov 8, 2013 at 7:53 PM, Fábio Lima <[email protected]> wrote: > Pelo que me consta, no google, facebook e etc. é até pior. Vamos todos > instalar servidores caseiros movidos a distros que não instalam spyware???? > > Não é cinismo nem postura "é assim mesmo, vamos nos conformar". É enxergar > as coisas no tamanho que elas tem. É perfeitamente possível desabilitar o > recurso, o software é livre e auditável e sempre podemos mudar, caso não > desejemos o recurso (que com certeza é útil pra muita gente). > > > 2013/11/8 João Santana <[email protected]> > > > Ainda acho o mesmo que achava antes, que se faz muita tempestade pra uma > > coisa fácil de resolver. Ou muda para off o item de configuração ou > muda-se > > de distribuição. > > > > João Santana > > Em 08/11/2013 17:50, "gustavo" <[email protected]> escreveu: > > > > > Caros, leiam a discussão abaixo. Afinal o que é que precisaria ser > > > "arrumado" no Ubuntu? É que desde a versão 12.10, a Canonical > sincroniza > > as > > > pesquisas do usuário no Dash com os resultados da Amazon.Ads. Para ter > > > controle sobre as suas pesquisas no seu próprio sistema, siga as > > instruções > > > abaixo: > > > > > > https://fixubuntu.com > > > > > > Gustavo > > > > > > > > > > > > https://micahflee.com/2013/11/canonical-shouldnt-abuse-trademark-law-to-silence-critics-of-its-privacy-decisions/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2012/10/privacy-ubuntu-1210-amazon-ads-and-data-leaks > > > > > > > > > > > > http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2013/11/canonical-abused-trademark-law-to-target-a-site-critical-of-ubuntu-privacy/ > > > > > > Canonical, the maker of Ubuntu, has been fending off criticism from > > privacy > > > advocates because the desktop search tool in recent versions of the > > > operating system also searches the Internet. That means if you're > > searching > > > your desktop for a file or application, you might also see results from > > > Amazon< > > > > > > http://arstechnica.com/business/2012/09/ubuntu-bakes-amazon-search-results-into-os-to-raise-cash/ > > > >or > > > other websites. > > > > > > One person who dislikes Canonical's search tool is Micah > > > Lee<https://twitter.com/micahflee>, > > > a technologist at the Electronic Frontier Foundation who maintains the > > > HTTPS Everywhere project and is CTO of the Freedom of the Press > > > Foundation<https://pressfreedomfoundation.org/about/staff>. > > > Lee set up a website called "Fix Ubuntu <https://fixubuntu.com/>," > which > > > provides instructions for disabling the Internet search tool. > > > > > > "If you're an Ubuntu user and you're using the default settings, each > > time > > > you start typing in Dash (to open an application or search for a file > on > > > your computer), your search terms get sent to a variety of third > parties, > > > some of which advertise to you," the website says. > > > > > > According to Lee, Canonical sent him an e-mail this morning asking him > to > > > stop using the Ubuntu logo and also to stop using the word "Ubuntu" in > > his > > > domain name. Lee reprinted the entire e-mail in a blog > > > post< > > > > > > https://micahflee.com/2013/11/canonical-shouldnt-abuse-trademark-law-to-silence-critics-of-its-privacy-decisions/ > > > >titled, > > > "Canonical shouldn’t abuse trademark law to silence critics of its > > > privacy decisions." The message reads: > > > > > > > > > Subject: Your Use of Ubuntu > > > From: ************@canonical.com > > > > > > Dear Micah, > > > > > > Canonical Limited (“Canonical”) owns and manages the intellectual > > property > > > rights in Ubuntu and other associated intellectual property. In > addition, > > > Canonical is the owner of numerous trademarks and copyright throughout > > the > > > world relating to Ubuntu, including Ubuntu logo and the word mark of > > > Ubuntu. > > > > > > It has been brought to our attention that your website: > > > https://fixubuntu.com/ is using Canonical’s trademarks including > Ubuntu > > > logo on your website and Ubuntu word in your domain name. The Ubuntu > logo > > > [1] and a screenshot of your website [2] are set out below. > > > > > > We are really pleased to know your interest in writing about Ubuntu. > But > > > whilst we can appreciate the passion Ubuntu inspires, we also have to > be > > > diligent to ensure that Ubuntu’s trademarks are used correctly. > > > > > > To keep the balance between the integrity of our trademarks and the > > ability > > > to use and promote Ubuntu, we’ve tried to define a reasonable > > Intellectual > > > Property Policy. You can read the full policy at > > > http://www.canonical.com/intellectual-property-policy. As you can see > > from > > > our policy, to use the Ubuntu trademarks and Ubuntu word in a domain > name > > > would require approval from Canonical. > > > > > > Unfortunately, in this instance we cannot give you permission to use > > Ubuntu > > > trademarks on your website and in your domain name as they may lead to > > > confusion or the misunderstanding that your website is associated with > > > Canonical or Ubuntu. > > > > > > So, whilst we are very happy for you to write about Ubuntu, we request > > you > > > to remove Ubuntu word from you domain name and Ubuntu logo from your > > > website. We would highly appreciate if you could confirm you have done > so > > > by replying this email to us. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To prove its point, the e-mail showed a screenshot of Lee's site with > the > > > Ubuntu logo: > > > > > > The policy Canonical pointed to does say that permission from the > company > > > is required to use "any Trademark in a domain name or URL or for > > > merchandising purposes." Lee argued that his use of the Ubuntu logo and > > the > > > name in his domain is "nominative > > > use<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nominative_use>" > > > and thus not a trademark violation. "Although I’m perfectly within my > > > rights to continue using both, I’ve decided to remove the Ubuntu logo > > from > > > the website, but add a disclaimer—because it seems like a nice thing to > > > do," he wrote. (The EFF, for what it's worth, has published this > > > list<https://www.eff.org/wp/tips-shutting-down-g>of tips to help > > > makers of parody sites avoid getting shut down.) > > > > > > That new disclaimer reads as follows: > > > > > > Disclaimer: In case you are either 1) a complete idiot; or 2) a lawyer; > > or > > > 3) both, please be aware that this site is not affiliated with or > > approved > > > by Canonical Limited. This site criticizes Canonical for certain > > > privacy-invading features of Ubuntu and teaches users how to fix them. > > So, > > > obviously, the site is not approved by Canonical. And our use of the > > > trademarked term Ubuntu is plainly descriptive—it helps the public find > > > this site and understand its message. > > > > > > His website still has the same domain name that includes the word > > "Ubuntu." > > > Canonical doesn't seem to have a problem with other websites using the > > word > > > Ubuntu in their domain names, such as "OMG! > > > Ubuntu!<http://www.omgubuntu.co.uk/>," > > > a news site that writes enthusiastically about the operating system. > > > > > > Canonical's registered trademark doesn't specifically mention domain > > names, > > > but it claims broad rights over the word Ubuntu for use in > > > "Telecommunication, communication, and broadcasting services provided > > > online, via the Internet, or via other communications networks," and > > > "transmission of information, data, text, images, graphics, sound > and/or > > > audio-visual material online, via the Internet or via other > > communications > > > networks." > > > > > > We've contacted Canonical about the e-mail sent to Lee, but haven't > heard > > > back yet. > > > > > > While Ubuntu's code is open source and free to everyone, Canonical > > > obviously hasn't given up its right to enforce its trademarks. Lee > argued > > > that the company's stance against his website "isn't very much in the > > > spirit of open source," though. The code for Fixubuntu.com is also open > > > source—Lee invited Canonical to "submit a patch" if it decides to help > > out > > > "in a more productive way." > > > > > > The EFF has already sent a response to Canonical, in a letter from EFF > > > Staff Attorney Daniel Nazer. "While we appreciate the polite tone of > your > > > letter, we must inform you that your request is not supported by > > trademark > > > law and interferes with protected speech," the letter says. "The > website > > > criticizes Canonical Limited for certain features of Ubuntu that Mr. > Lee > > > believes undermine user privacy and teaches users how to fix these > > > problems. It is well-settled that the First Amendment fully protects > the > > > use of trademarked terms and logos in non-commercial websites that > > > criticize and comment upon corporations and products. Mr. Lee's site > is a > > > clear example of such protected speech. Neither Mr. Lee, nor any other > > > member of the public, must seek your permission before engaging in such > > > constitutionally protected expression." > > > > > > *UPDATE*: Canonical responded to Ars, providing the following > statement: > > > "To protect the Ubuntu brand, we need to ensure that wherever you see > the > > > Ubuntu logo, it’s an authentic part of the Ubuntu community. We have a > > > public policy (http://www.canonical.com/intellectual-property-policy), > > > which > > > is open and accessible, and protects the brand. It states where you can > > > freely use the Ubuntu brand and where a licence is needed. Trademark > law > > > requires us to protect our trademarks, so where needed we will always > > start > > > a dialogue to ensure the trademarks are used properly to avoid > > confusion." > > > -- > > > Mais sobre o Ubuntu em português: http://www.ubuntu-br.org/comece > > > > > > Lista de discussão Ubuntu Brasil > > > Histórico, descadastramento e outras opções: > > > https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-br > > > > > -- > > Mais sobre o Ubuntu em português: http://www.ubuntu-br.org/comece > > > > Lista de discussão Ubuntu Brasil > > Histórico, descadastramento e outras opções: > > https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-br > > > > > > -- > --------------------------------------------------- > Fábio Lima ([email protected]) > -- > Mais sobre o Ubuntu em português: http://www.ubuntu-br.org/comece > > Lista de discussão Ubuntu Brasil > Histórico, descadastramento e outras opções: > https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-br > -- Mais sobre o Ubuntu em português: http://www.ubuntu-br.org/comece Lista de discussão Ubuntu Brasil Histórico, descadastramento e outras opções: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-br
