Re: [Linux-aus] FireFox vs IceWeasel

[Jeff Waugh <jdub@perkypants.org>]

<quote who="Paul Wayper">

> So, realistically, you're only going to actually _look_for_ IceWeasel if
> you care enough about FireFox allowing and using proprietary binaries. 

> IceWeasel is just taking the Free Software Advocacy position to its
> illogical extreme.

Sorry, but this is fundamentally wrong. Firefox was not renamed to Iceweasel
in Debian due to "allowing and using proprietary binaries". It was renamed
because the maintainer believed MoFo's **trademark** compliancy requirements
had a detrimental impact on his ability to comply with the DFSG.

If Debian can't: ship the trademark logo icon because it is non-Free, can't
ship the trademark product name (because without the icon, Mofo refused the
trademark license), can't pass trademark license rights to derivatives, and
can't feasibly manage distribution and security patch approval... Then how
can Debian be compliant with the trademark compliancy requirements, and how
can they ship "Firefox"?

This storm has been brewing for years. Trademarks are an unsolved problem in
the FLOSS space, and it is *not* an "illogical extreme" that puts us there.

Note: Mozilla and Firefox are not the only FLOSS products that suffer from
this issue. They're just the only ones defending their trademark correctly
(largely because they're so exposed that they *have* to).

- Jeff

-- 
linux.conf.au 2007: Sydney, Australia           http://lca2007.linux.org.au/
 
       "A rest with a fermata is the moral opposite of the fast food
           restaurant with express lane." - James Gleick, Faster