Slashdot Mirror

Well, maybe you look at this page especially at the second download link. But maybe you are just trolling, after all.

Yes, but you have to think in Russian

Only if you're using Firefox. As AC hinted, Chrome can do this translation for you.

A typical OSS license only involves copyright, and related issues such as redistribution and making changes.

However many OSS software is "sold" with all kinds of claims on what it can do. Have a look at the Firefox home page for example:

Meet the World’s Best Browser With security, stability, speed and much more, Firefox is made for the way you use the Web.

That's what it starts with. I would consider this plain advertising, and as such fall under relevant advertising laws for a start.

Now indeed when I download this software I do not sign a sales contract with the Mozilla Foundation, however I do have certain expectations regarding fitness for purpose and so. Bugs I expect that there are in it, I also expect that the writer will for starters do their best to write bug-free software, and when bugs are found that they will take reasonable action to solve them. And the bigger the project the higher those expectations.

An interesting case would become if someone loses say bank details due to a security leak in Mozilla or the underlying OS (thinking of Microsoft's Windows mainly of course). Especially if that bug is known and not acted upon.

Can anyone hold the e.g. Mozilla Foundation liable for such issues? Even when no money changed hands? They do have quite bold claims on their home page, obviously encouraging you to use their product.

JavaScript tracing is not enabled for Web Workers, resulting in slower than usual JavaScript execution time (see bug 538440)

For Windows versions, the current 'release' version of Opera (9.64) is 5.4MB. The beta (10.00b1) is 6.6MB. Firefox 3.0.11 is 7MB.

http://www.mozilla-europe.org/en/firefox/ http://www.opera.com/download/get.pl?id=32022 http://www.opera.com/browser/download/?ver=10.00b1

Get firefox
http://www.mozilla-europe.org/en/firefox/

Block ads.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/1136

Block cookies.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/5207

Tip: If you want to enable cookies on a current site, click the CS Lite icon at bottom and click "Temporarily allow Slashdot.org"

Block javascript.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/722

Tip: If you want to enable javascript, click the NoScript icon at bottom and click "Temporarily allow Slashdot.org"

Can anyone else suggest a much better way to protect privacy? I want a simple no-nonsense list to give to my friends who aren't nerdy enough to know that one plus one can equal ten.

Obviously, the server's down. But I got through by going around to http://www.mozilla-europe.org/en/firefox/

Direct link that work for me : http://download.mozilla.org/?product=firefox-3.0&os=win&lang=en-US

# ./firefox
Error: in (function call): procedure or syntax required but got: Error: fatal: looped fatal error

I guess there is a plugin or setting error, or something. A google search for this generates a lot of people with the same problem but no solution.

http://www.mozilla-europe.org/en/ appears to be correct now.

Whether it counts toward the record attempt I neither know nor care...

http://www.mozilla-europe.org/en/

http://www.mozilla-europe.org/en/

Anyone know why firefox.com is redirecting to http://www.mozilla-europe.org/ru/products/firefox?

You don't need to use Linux for it to render correctly.

Firefox

> If I can't find what I'm looking for, I don't care if nobody knows about it.

Agreed. Results are paramount.

I'd rather choose my favourite search engine based on technical merit, then take steps to protect my privacy myself. It means I get the satisfaction of not having to rely on hidden propriety code on someone else's server for my privacy.

To get around the Google big-bad-data-retention, I find that Firefox + CookieCuller + FoxyProxy + TOR works pretty well.

This is hysterical. I hope Ebay and Mozilla keep dragging their feet long enough for new users to get used to the other toolbar.

That'll be the eBay Companion for Firefox they released on May 3rd then.

eBay cannot simply release their plugin now

They released it on May 3.

They also cannot simply change their site functionality to break the student plugin, as they'll alienate customers who are using it.

Sure they can. They've got no obligation to support third-party extensions. From an eBay user's perspective, the eBay site will continue to work flawlessly but the extension will be broken. Who's the user going to blame?

You don't have to be a lawyer to figure out if the customer prefers better functionality.

You don't have to be a lawyer to see that this is an open-and-shut trademark infringement case. Go to the My eBay Fox website. It looks very similar to the official Firefox website. It uses the Firefox and eBay logos. There's a clear possibility that consumers will believe that My eBay Fox is a product of the Mozilla Corporation and eBay. This is exactly the situation trademark law is designed to deal with. If My eBay Fox has a security bug or is just plain crashy, there's a strong possibility it could reflect badly on Mozilla and eBay. Trademarks are all about trust and reputation. The developers of My eBay Fox don't have the right to hijack the goodwill associated with Mozilla and eBay and put it at risk.

While Firefox is open-source, the name Firefox and the logo are trademarked. If you want to distribute an extension with Firefox and call it Firefox, you have to get permission from the Mozilla Foundation. See the 'Extensions, Themes and Plugins' section of the Mozilla Trademark Policy for details. They'd be on much safer ground if they called it Steamdonkey or something. Of course, eBay are a more traditional company, so their trademark policy will be even stricter.

Either way, My eBay Fox will not continue to branded and marketed as it is at present for much longer.

If you want to include all or part of a Mozilla trademark in a domain name, you have to receive written permission from Mozilla. People naturally associate domain names with organizations whose names sound similar. Almost any use of a Mozilla trademark in a domain name is likely to confuse consumers, thus running afoul of the overarching requirement that any use of a Mozilla trademark be non-confusing. If you would like to build a Mozilla, Firefox Internet browser or Thunderbird e-mail client promotional site for your region, we encourage you to join an existing official localization project.
source

So Mozilla does state a policy regarding exactly what has occurred here. The problem is, U.S. trademark laws don't have any teeth in Korea. In fact, there is a U.S. government-run site that goes into great detail about how companies that have registered trademarks in the U.S. should not try to do business in Korea (or enforce their trademarks, of course) until they have registered their trademark in Korea, as well:

Basic intellectual property laws exist in Korea. However, protection of intellectual property and the laws governing enforcement of these protections are not necessarily extra-territorial. What is understood and practiced in the United States is not always practiced in Korea. U.S. companies wishing to sell their products or services in Korea should first and foremost find out if they have to register their intellectual property rights (copyright, trademark or patents) in Korea...One of the most frequent IPR problems facing U.S. businesses in Korea is trademark protection.
source

Now, the last piece relates to trademark use by localization teams. The site distributing the binaries was in fact run by a Korean Firefox localization team, however, Mozilla has yet to refuse their right to use the trademarks, as per Mozilla Foundation policy, which allows use by localization teams in general, and rejects only in specific instances:

It is very important that Community Releases of Firefox and Thunderbird maintain (or even exceed!) the quality level people have come to associate with Mozilla Firefox and Mozilla Thunderbird. We need to ensure this, but we don't want to get in people's way. So, we are taking an optimistic approach. Official L10n teams can start using the "Firefox Community Edition" and "Thunderbird Community Edition" trademarks from day one, but the Mozilla Foundation may require teams to stop doing so in the future if they are redistributing software with low quality and efforts to remedy the situation have not succeeded. Doing things this way allows us to give as much freedom to people as possible, while maintaining our trademarks as a mark of quality (which we are required to do in order to keep them).
source

I'll readily admit that I have no idea whether Mozilla has attempted to reject their right to use the Mozilla trademark, but given the warning found on U.S. government sites regarding trademark enforcement, I'd say it would be prodigal use of the foundation's limited resources. Further, there is nothing to indicate that there is in fact any "affiliation" whatsoever, as nowhere does Mozilla Foundation acknowledge the presence of the Korean site (although its URL does appear on a Mozilla-run wiki - who knows who put it there).

In any case, this reflects poorly only on the part of the Korean Localization Team, as Mozilla Foundation likely lacks the resources to succesfully pursue a trademark infringement case abroad in Korea, and we have already established that the site is not an official Mozilla site (unlike, for example, http://www.mozilla-europe.org/ or

While I agree totally that xx.mozilla.org should forward to the right pages, you say you have not found it. I believe there's a link to Mozilla-Europe somewhere, but here's the url for the lazy:

http://www.mozilla-europe.org/nl/

Hope that helps.

"We provide access to search services from a range of sources including Google, Yahoo, Amazon, eBay and others," Mozilla Foundation President Mitchell Baker wrote in a Nov. 8 blog posting. "We expect to see some funds come to the foundation as a result of our integrated search...

I've read better articles on firefox and Interviews with their creators. I found it sad that they didnt include probably the most powerful feature of the browswer that is leaps and bounds ahead of explorer. That feature that wasn't mentioned was KeyWord bookmarks, basicly the association of a keyword to your bookmarks! Imagine using the address bar on your browser as if it were a customizable search engine unto itself. An example is that you can bookmark FedEx.com then right click on it and attach multiple keywords to the bookmark, now if you need to track packeges via fedex.com there is now no need to actually visit the site; all you have to do is type in your address bar: track: (enter tracking number here) and firefox will plug that tracking number into FedEx and immdiately return the status of your package and all pertinent details. The possibilites of this feature are endless and saves so a lot of time that you would be normally be spending on load times from navigating said site. Like I said this feature is so awesome and unique I fail to see why anyone would leave it out when talking about FireFox.

to read more about this feature: http://mozilla-europe.org/en/products/firefox/sear ch/

Mozilla Europe's site still seems fast: http://www.mozilla-europe.org/en/products/firefox/

For the Europeans: http://www.mozilla-europe.org/en/products/firefox/

Donkey:

OS X Will rule this world
Windows Exe
tar.gz

Firefox on the other hand is free, but how much effort do they put into telling people about their browser? Zero.

They have a branding/marketing department, and the main website at Mozilla.org is clearly consumer-oriented. The plentiful reviews of the browser are almost always positive. They also provide telephone support. They have setup a european promotion and deployment division to provide enterprise services among others. If they have to purchase space for magazine advertisements to get the news out, when Microsoft doesn't since it's bundled, I think things have clearly gone too far.

Yes, unbundling IE might be a bad idea from a "Joe user" perspective. So a good alternative might be to remove all stuff like WMP, IE, Outlook Express, etc but still allow MS to put these tools on a second CD, just like Apple put extra tools for MacOS X on a separate CD. Then all they need is to insert a CD, get presented with a simple autostart menu where they can install the software they like, and avoid what they don't like.

The thing I want to get away from is that you auto-get IE and other assorted software and can't even remove it.

Firefox on the other hand is free, but how much effort do they put into telling people about their browser? Zero.

They have a branding/marketing department, and the main website at Mozilla.org is clearly consumer-oriented. The plentiful reviews of the browser are almost always positive. They also provide telephone support. They have setup a european promotion and deployment division to provide enterprise services among others. If they have to purchase space for magazine advertisements to get the news out, when Microsoft doesn't since it's bundled, I think things have clearly gone too far.

Yes, unbundling IE might be a bad idea from a "Joe user" perspective. So a good alternative might be to remove all stuff like WMP, IE, Outlook Express, etc but still allow MS to put these tools on a second CD, just like Apple put extra tools for MacOS X on a separate CD. Then all they need is to insert a CD, get presented with a simple autostart menu where they can install the software they like, and avoid what they don't like.

The thing I want to get away from is that you auto-get IE and other assorted software and can't even remove it.