Slashdot Mirror
Firefox Faces Trademark Issues
daria42 writes "The Debian development community is currently hotly debating whether the Mozilla Foundation's strict trademarks policy violates Debian's social contract. However, in a twist, it appears Mozilla has not received approval for the Firefox trademarks yet, and the Firefox name may already be taken in the UK and Germany. The foundation has not applied for the Thunderbird trademark anywhere yet."
So I wonder what new name they'll pick now...
Why does something open source / free have to always be about money? I have never heard the term Firefox before the Firefox browser (not saying something of Firefox didn't exist).
Also, why does it take over a year or so to come about?
"I cannot think of any need in childhood as strong as the need for a father's protection." -- Sigmund Freud
Good thing I installed that plugin, almost makes the browser change name less often.
Sigs are bad for your health
https://addons.mozilla.org/extensions/moreinfo.php ?id=31
Lindows > Linspire
Mandrake > Mandriva
Firefox > ?
Why can't OSS just pick a name and stick to it?
Well, at least they didn't name it Mad Dog 20/20. Everyone would recognize that as a straight ripoff of a name.
The Spoon
Updated 6/28/2011
As far as I can see the Firefox trademark policy isn't fundamentally different from Debian's own trademark policy.
If you are distributing what Debian distribute you can call it Debian. If you want to do something different, call it something else.
Isn't that essentially what the Firefox trademark policy says?
Boffoonery - downloadable Comedy Benefit for Bletchley Park
FireBird oops that won't work. Ok Foxbird and ThunderFire anyone?
Si vis pacem, para bellum! For evil to succeed good men need only do nothing!
Why do I have the sinking feeling that we're all going to be sitting here in ten years time, reading about the Godzilla Foundation dispute over ScorchedBadger and LightningParakeet?
*blinking cursor*
They could try, FieryTrademarkLaw. Or FireFucked. Or FireGenericUnusedAnimal. Or even FireTrademarksSuck. FTS for short. "FTS" really rolls off the tongue just right...
So I'm interested in reading the actual discussions on the debian mailinglists - because I have this strange quirk where I actually find them interesting.
/. ? They're worse than useless.
So, google site:lists.debian.org firefox trademark - nothing since february, all of which has long since been resolved. So much for "recently criticised".
Could we please just stop linking to zdnet/cnet/... articles here on
Firefox should be changed to "Internet Explorer." It's basic enough, tells everyone what it does. For thunderbird, I'm thinking we call it "Mail." After all, that's pretty much what Thunderbird is.
I hope those names aren't taken.
... a Leonardo Da Quirm replacement name:- web-browser.
Super-fast-and-cross-platform-and-expandable-free
I think that just rolls off the tongue, don't you?
multifariam.net -- yet another nerd blog
Rename your browser a few times just to keep the general public too confused to ever really adopt it. If that looks like it's not going to completely do the trick then make a point of choosing some of the stupidest names for the program that you can possibly find.
Firefox is literally too good to have this stuff keep happening to it. This is what I call a damn shame.
Appended to the end of comments you post. 120 chars.
Checking the USPTO's website, it appears that the FIREFOX mark will be registered shortly.
The mark was published in October of 2004, meaning the trademark examiner had approved it other than the required statement of use.
The examiner, after there were no oppositions filed, issued a notice of allowance, basically saying, "the mark is O.K., but you need to show use before registration will issue."
And on June 7th, the specimens of use that Mozilla submitted evidencing use were accepted. The acceptance letter stated:
"The Statement of Use (SOU) filed for the trademark application identified above has been accepted. This acceptance means that the mark will register and the registration certificate will issue in due course barring any extraordinary circumstances."
So, in the U.S. at least, FIREFOX (the mark) is good to go.
keeps the FF shorthand, and hopefully original d-:
or Fire Frog, Fire Fetish, Fire Your Boss...
Warning: Sig Fault. Dumping warp core.
Call it Flamebait.
t
Although I completely agree with the parent that ZDNet articles are worse than useless, there has been recent discussion on the debian mailinglist. Don't know why it's not in google yet (too recent), but the thread on debian-devel starts here.
Debian is not after market share, read the Debian Social Contract.It's about freedom.
But then again if you tired of Linux politics don't bother. But you will be sorry when this is the only alternative.
Debian wants to exert an interesting amount of control over what they package. That's fine. In my opinion, it's a bit control-freaky, but that's their thing, and they're welcome to it. They're allowed.
Mozilla gives away products. It also gives away the source for those products. It doesn't mind people making alterations to it's products. It just wants you to not call it the same thing.
That's not such a bad thing.
I wouldn't want to install Debian, only to find out that the version of "Firefox" is installed isn't the same as the version I could get from Mozilla.
Where's the problem here, honestly? Call it "Mozilla Firefox - Debian Community Edition" or "Debian Web Browser - Based on Mozilla Technology"
Or just distribute the original thing in it's original form.
Greedo shot first. Didn't we learn our lesson about messing with previous releases?
In other news...
The Debian development community is currently hotly debating whether the Debian Project's strict trademarks policy violates Debian's social contract.
Oh, boy! I can't wait to see how this one turns out!
I remember when legal used to mean lawful, now it means some kind of loophole. - Leo Kessler
I liked this when I was 12-- HBO used to show it all the time:
"A pilot is sent into the Soviet Union on a mission to steal a prototype jet fighter that can be partially controlled by a neuralink."
1984-- a very good year-- Macintosh first appeared, Firefox on HBO, and Airwolf on CBS. Best... tv show theme... ever.
Go to Help -> About Firefox...
"Some trademark rights used under licence from The Charlton Company."
And that a mark can also be defined by use. Has anyone ever heard of a "Firefox" in those two countries, that is even computer-related? What is the time limitation on trademark disputes in those two jurisdictions?
HotSmallMemberOfTheCanidaeFamily
"I use a Mac because I'm just better than you are."
Just saw an article on Le Monde (in French) saying that FF now accounts for 14% of internet traffic in Europe overall, with anything from 7% (Lithuania) to 30% (Finland) in individual countries. It seems kind of amazing to me that in Germany it has achieved 24%. Is this the fastest new product acceptance in history? (Chime in if you can think of a faster /bigger one).
The trouble with so much success is that people are going to come out the woodwork claiming trademark issues. And I can only wonder what will happen when it reaches 50%...
ph3arp0x
//SaVa
How about, "The browser formerly known as Firefox"
with, "we're gonna' browse like it's 1999"
Cotton needed frequent replacement, and nylon was cheaper than cotton (and didn't wear out). Next time you needed new line, you bought nylon.
A few weeks ago, I installed the autoconf package on my Debian system, only to discover that there was no documentation included in the standard /usr/share/doc/autoconf/ location. After checking, I discovered that it'd be recently removed, because Debian considers the GNU Free Documentation Licence -- the main documentation licence promoted by the FSF -- as a non-free licence. (Debian has concerns about how it'd work in DRM environments. The Free Software Foundation doesn't agree.)
Luckily in that case, there's now an autoconf-doc package in the non-free section of Debian, and I installed that. What confuses me, though, is how Debian expects to cope in the future if it doesn't accept something as the GFDL, which is widely accepted as the Free Software Foundation's GPL-for-documentation, and used in a lot of places related to open source. All of the KDE help files, for instance, are distributed under the GFDL. Debian hasn't cut them yet, but does this mean that it won't be including them as soon as someone realises?
I really like Debian and I have no plans to stop using it unless it stops being possible to do what I want. I'm impressed by the project's dedication to being so specific about licences, but sometimes I wonder how much of that will eventually come back to haunt it.
Does anyone remember the FireFox film staring Clint Eastwood where his character is a US Air Force test pilot who is on a mission to steal a prototype Russian jet-fighter.
FireFox and FireFox Down are two books by Craig Thomas of which the film is based upon the first book. Both fun to read - I'd reccomend it if you liked the old cold-war inspired novels, although the 2nd book was written after cracks started appearing in the Iron Curtain.
-- The universe began. Life started on a billion worlds...
-- Except on one where stupidity was there first.
The Firefox trademark was allowed for registration on 2005-04-15. It's currently in the "publication and issue section", where they print up the nice certificate with the seal and ribbon and send it to the Mozilla Foundation, print the notice in the Official Gazette of the United States Patent and Trademark Office and send it to all Depositary Libraries, "enter the trademark upon the Principal Register", and do all that 19th century stuff.
But it's been a done deal since April.
Yes, Microsoft gave its browser away for free, which was a major problem for Netscape's market share, but to be fair, Netscape 4 was a big, bloated, bug-ridden pile of shit, and it certainly didn't help its own cause. At the time, IE was by far the superior browser.
I have the ultimate solution to all of our trademark issues. Simply use MD5 hashes instead of the original names. d6a5c9544eca9b5ce2266d1c34a93222 is catchier than Firefox anyways.
i don't know if firefox the movie can be called famous. not even in russian. ;P
and trademarks tend to be limted to the specific industry. hence apple computer and apple music [think beatles].
sum.zero
That isn't the argument at hand here. The argument that I would put forward is that the prior examples have no rights as these names are used in their respective segments of the software market - without prior usage of the trademarks. Example - Kodak have the trademark 'Gold'. This stops people creating camera film named 'Gold'. It does not stop people creating software called 'Gold'.
If you ask people why they have used and still use IE, I'm sure that the vast majority of people will say that "it came with the operating system", not that it was better or worse. Add onto that their security problems, virus issues, spyware issues and so forth, it's no wonder that Firefox is as popular as it is.
So, regardless of how bad Netscape was, Microsoft, their tactics, and their lack of security are still the primary reasons why Firefox was deemed to be necessary and was therefore created. If IE wasn't forced on everyone, if IE wasn't integrated into every nook and cranny of Windows, and if IE didn't install spyware because I right-clicked on a picture, do you really think that Firefox would be here? (I'm beging facetious on the spyware due to a right-click, of course, but it's sadly not far from the truth.)
The Overrated mod is for reversing inappropriate, positive mods, not for voicing disagreement with a post.
Ok now the mods are definitely on pot. Firesomething was a plugin created (as a joke) after the Firebird -> Firefox name change. It allows you to pick up weird names like firegoat, waterbird, etc.
On a serious note, I can't wait to see either. I would hate to see this:
Look out for the release of Fireferret 1.1 this summer!
Why can't OSS just pick a name
:-S
Not recursive acronyms please!
"PAF Ain't Firefox!" *shudders*
I'm gonna have nightmares tonight...
Or, you know, they could be naming them after the actual firefox and thunderbird, which is where all those other things get the names, too. Hell, I'd have never connected that puppet show with the mail client, and I have to say I've never even heard of that movie.
The main problem I see is that these Mozilla guys keep using generic and unintuitive names for their software. When I hear "firefox" or "phoenix," in no way would I automatically think of a web browser, or a software program at all. "Thunderbird" just makes me think of a car. Hell, Mozilla was the internal project name for the Netscape browser. There's a reason that they don't use project names as the release name at software companies.
That said, I really don't want to see another reason that these firefox guys have to change the browser name. They could have picked a bit better, but now that it's got name recognition, we gotta stick with it.
[insert witty quote here]
Which might work except during the biggest period of IE's growth, the relevant versions (3.x and 4.x) weren't actually bundled with Windows - they had to be downloaded separately.
The probably should distribute Firefox with Firesomething extension enabled...
"It is our choices, Harry, that show what we truly are, far more than our abilities." -- Prof. Dumbledore
What's in a name? That which we call a rose by any other name would smell as sweet
-- Act II, scene ii, Romeo and Juliet, Wm. Shakespeare
I doubt they've been taken.
Why wouldn't they just apply for "Mozilla Firefox", and "Mozilla Thunderbird"??? Granted, it's not as keen, but the industry will truncate either to the latter word, and they'll have the appropriate TM. This shenanigans is kinda dumb. :)
Maybe Debian could rename their Firefox to MPL/GPL/LGPL/Firefox.
I don't give a shit what it's called as long as it's stable and secure. They can call it Jabba the browser and I will still use it over anything else.
This is pathetic... Firefox changed it's name from Firebird because of trademark crappalazoo!
But they forgot to trademark firefox? Whoooopppps!
It's interesting because the Debian trademark and the firefox trademark are actually WORTH something now, it pays to distribute software with those names!
It appears one of the flaws of open source has been exposed.
TBFKAF (The Browser Formerly Known As Firefox)
How about... Mozilla.
OK, Perhaps Mozilla v2.
I'm pretty sure they would have THAT covered, it's better known, and is bloody obvious.
Highly unoriginal, I know, but the only really sane thing to do.
Maybe it's just a pity it doesn't say:
The license may require derived works to carry different name, version numbers and/or trademarks from the original software.
Boffoonery - downloadable Comedy Benefit for Bletchley Park
As far as I can see the Firefox trademark policy isn't fundamentally different from Debian's own trademark policy.
It might very well be the case that if Debian were to be included recursively in itself, perhaps with some minor modifications and updates, there would be a similar conflict. They sidestep this issue since they don't have to make the whole distribution available on the same terms that included software is, at least as far as trademarks are concerned.
"(Man) tries to live his own life as if he were telling a story. But you have to choose: live or tell." --Sartre
And in a leap of wild abandon, call the bloody e-mail program something like... Mozilla MAIL.
IIRC, Windows 98 came with IE4.
The filesystem is the package manager
Don't some sequential versions include the prior?
Video Production Support
Get a clue! You sound like with the Debian Social Contract, Microsoft would be walking all over everything. But reality shows something else. Reality shows NON-DEBIAN distros emerging, growing and putting down deep roots, even at the same time that Microsoft is a monopoly. Mandrake, SuSE, Slackware, Gentoo, et al, do not operate under the Debian Social Contract. They include GFDL documentation. They include Firefox. Back when Debian said KDE was illegal, they included KDE. And did Microsoft destroy them for it? OF COURSE NOT!
Debian isn't about freedom, it's about anal pedantic legalism.
Don't blame me, I didn't vote for either of them!
Has anyone actually bottered to check the PTO in the UK before going off on one about how Firefox is already registered?
If you go over there and have a little look you will notice that the mozilla foundation has filed their trademark application and none of the other firefox applications directly conflict with it. There are others in class 9 but none of them specifically list web browser (which the firefox applicaiton does) as part of the application. The biggest threat, IMHO, is 2007607 which bangs on about software but from an analysis point of view. IANAL but I would say that firefox will probably be granted the trademark in the UK at least.
I used to have a better sig but it broke.
I like these options using anagrams, they can just scramble the letters on the logos:
For Thunderbird:
Dr Ruth in bed
Red Bird Hunt
Inbred Hut Dr
For Firefox:
Fife XOR
Offer IX
FIFO Rex
Your hybrid is not saving the environment. Its purpose is to make you feel good about buying something.
Which packages are ones which employed or employ licences which "require derived works to carry a different name"?
Did Debian rename them? Perhaps if there's some historical cases of this happening I can relate to the problem might be clearer?
Boffoonery - downloadable Comedy Benefit for Bletchley Park
I don't get why these GPL and other such nonsense licenses are such a pain.. Why can't they just say, "here is my work, you can modify it, but you have to give me props, and you can't make money off it by claiming its yours." Debian is going to start running out of stuff for their releases if they scrutinize every single package for "what ifs"..
From what I gather, the whole issue that the debain people have with the firefox trademark, is that if you change firefox with a bug-fix the license implies you have to rename it.. Debian was granted permission to do this and still use the firefox trademark in debian systems.. however some at debian feel that the debian versions, first of all need to be able to be used in any linux system, and secondly that if debian can have the ability then any linux distrubutor (no matter how small) should also have the same abilities,, and that it is unlikely that all linux distributors would have such privliges
Personaly, although I admire the moral stance that debian is debating, I don't see the problem. Fix the bugs, submit the fix to mozilla. From here you have 3 choices.. give your users the fixed firefox called firefox with mozilla's blessing, wait for mozilla to distribute your fixed version so you are supplying what everyone else can have, or fork your own debian firefox based browser (I think this is unacceptable to debian though)
I really don't see what is wrong with doing BOTH of the first two choices. support all of linux, but still service your users as quickly as possible.
waiting for ad.doubleclick.net
Why not call Firefox "COOL, FREE SCREENSAVER.EXE", and Thunderbird "HOT WEBCAM GIRLS OOPS!.EXE" and just watch the adoption rate increase like crazy.
No?
www.freshpilot.com
ThunderPussy!
> If you are distributing what Debian distribute you can call it Debian. If you want to do something different, call it something else.
Actually no. If you publish the original Debian, it's an "official release" and you can use the Debian swirl logo together with the "magic lamp". If you make a derived version, it's a "vendor release". You can still use the swirl, but without the "magic lamp".
http://www.debian.org/logos/
http://www.debian.org/CD/vendors/
Please note that on both logos you can use the word "Debian".
The problem here arises because AFAIK the Mozilla Foundation has no such strategy, i.e. there's no name that distributors can take if they change the sources.
And make Angelina Jolie to be its official face.
Articulos para gente geek: Poleras, linux, libros y mas
Dammit, where is FireSomething when we need it! It needs to be updated to be compatible with newer versions of Firefox/Lightningnarwhal/...
My favourite Firesomething name was Mozilla Superkoala, I'll vote for that.
I believe posters are recognized by their sig. So I made one.
Firefox > Firdiva or if you wanna go the Lispire way, Firefox > Assfire.
My Aurora : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o91ZsGwJYyg
FB : https://www.facebook.com/TanveersPhotography
Debian is trademarked. You can take Debian, mess with the code and then distribute it, but you CAN NOT call it Debian.
Firefox is trademarked. You can take Firefox, mess with the code and then distribute it, but you CAN NOT call it Firefox.
If Debian doesn't like being on the receiving end of this, maybe they should change THEIR OWN trademark policy.
When I hear "firefox" or "phoenix," in no way would I automatically think of a web browser, or a software program at all.
Because "Outlook" certainly sounds like an email client and "Excel" just makes you automatically think of a spreadsheet... And infact, how do "Cheerios" tell you they're a breakfast cerial? Please...
http://blog.nexusuk.org
I think Debian serves an important purpose. It can be seen as a "pure" distribution. I don't use it, and I never will (likely), but it seems to be a GREAT starting point for a derivative work. Search distrowatch for a debian based distro.
I hate grammar Nazi's.
Indeed it did, however, IE's major boom time was the ~12 months *before* Windows 98 was released, when IE4 was only available for download. This was the real bloodbath for Navigator, when their marketshare dropped from something like 90%+ to less than 50%. Going back a bit further, IE's marketshare was basically nonexistant until IE3 was released, when it captured about 10% of the market off Navigator, without being bundled with Windows.
Apparently it's been registered in Germany since 1995! "Firefox" as a trademark for use in computer software, computer consulting, etc. (trademark group 42 in the German trademark system) has been registered in 1995 to "Firefox Communications Limited, Solihull, GB". Presumably these are the same folks holding the trademark in GB. :-))
A short research in the publically searchable database of the German national patent and trademark registry (http://dpinfo.dpma.de/ would have shown that.
Since they trademarks have been registered in 1995, I find it highly unlikely (but not infinitely improbable) that they were registered in order to "cash in" on the Firefox browser popularity.
Mind you, "Firefox" has also been registered by Volkswagen in 2005. So watch out for the new VW Beetle Firefox (with tabbed driver's seat) at a car dealership near you
Dan.
How about replacing it with some beautiful symbol ... it could be known as 'The Browser formerly known as FireFox'?
Oh dear.
But you still have Debian (the group of people) being allowed to do something other people aren't allowed to.
What is the difference between:
SPI (the trademark holder) allowing Debian (the affiliation of people) to alter Debian (the software) and still use the original mark while not giving everyone else that right.
Mozilla (the trademark holder) allowing Debian (the affiliation of people) to alter Firefox (the software) and still use the original mark while not giving everyone else that right.
To be logically consistant Debian (the group of people) should not be able to distribute the Debian software with the Debian trademark. Debian has been granted management of that trademark by SPI and does not give the same rights to those they distribute to.
If the DSFG stop Debian (the group) using the Firefox trademark because they have been granted special rights to it then it must also stop them using the Debian one.
Boffoonery - downloadable Comedy Benefit for Bletchley Park
There you go, problem solved.
Restrictions, restrict freedom. Do you have a different dictionary than the rest of the world?
I respect that it is your right to shackle yourself with whatever rules/social contract etc... you want but that has nothing to do with promoting "freedom".
Jesus was a compassionate social conservative who called individuals to sin no more.
Firefox changes its name yet again to ASDHDSFHSDFFF
Still though, today - right now - if you ask most people why they use IE, they will respond with "It came with the computer" or "What's IE, oh you mean the internet".
kaens.blogspot.com
There was a simillar problem for mozilla thunderbird. When it first appeared in Debian Sid, it was called Mozilla Thunderbird. Now it is called Debian Thunderbird.
This name change was asked by the Mozilla Foundation because Mozilla Thunderbird is trademarked by the Mozilla Foundation and they don't seem to enjoy unofficial builds (i.e. builds that are not downloaded from mozilla.org or one of its mirrors)
So now I use Debian Thunderbird, and I suppose sooner or later I will use "Debian Firefox". So what ? I don't mind at all ..
This is about Trademarks, not copyright. You copyright a creative work, not a name.
It's quite OK to have a film called something and a web browser with the same name. They aren't in the same field, so that is allowed.
Actually, everything is about intrinsic value. Capitalism and socialism falsely assume that this property applies only to money, which is why they don't work so well. Other things beside money do have intrinsic value -- but not that can be meaningfully measured in pounds, shillings and pence.
There is a small but growing proportion of society that is recognising the inapplicability of money to all situations. Still, while the Old Rulers have power, they will want to do anything they can to keep the Old Systems which benefit them in place.
The Debian development community is currently hotly debating whether the Debian Project's strict trademarks policy violates Debian's social contract.
You win again Gödal!
Mozilla Navigator ?
I'm sure the Netscape people won't object, given how much they depend on Mozilla's code...
Gonqueror ?
The mascot could be the dog from Elvira: Mistress of the Dark
...I believe now is the time, -again-, for the re-surfacing of 'Green Hornet' and 'Kato'...
--Seems rather descriptive for what features are therein; you could even make *KABLAAM!* and *POW!* -extensions for each popup/spammail blocked; to think of the endless skin posibilities too!
-Weeh! =)
A horse can't be sick, you know, even if he wants to.
Gecko Browser? Thats what the Firefox 1.1 trunk builds brand themselves as unless you set the configure switch to show you have the Mozilla Foundations permission. Its a bit weird seeing it build an app called "firefox-bin" thats not allowed call itself Firefox, though...
. . . or is their absurdly broad domain name section begging for a mozillatrademarkpolicysucks.org website?
Linux is patented. Before you start casting your sword of pious Freedom around, realise that you should fight the right battles.
Trademarking open source project names (I realise Mozilla are a bit bitchfucky about this) is a good idea, and definately should be done. Open source is allowed to sell itself, marketwise and financial wise.
I don't think debian can be harmed (and debian is just a distro, debian is basically an installer and package manager, and some default wallpapers, like most distros (and lots of packaging of projects) by having 'branded' name open source. What do they want to call Firefox?
Debian Extra Value Generic Browser?
Trademarking is good to promote image of a product that was written in a community.
What I found funny is: Mozilla community wrote Firefox (and i.e. the whole shebang of moving the NS code around, into mozilla, the XUL stuff, etc) YET debian are debating the legitimacy of their trademarking?
I mean, they should flavour their wrods cautiously, not to diminish or reprimand mozilla for choosing their own stance on trademarks, but just to imply their decision unfortunately would not allow them to have this great software, and then, bully for them!
I like debian actually.
#hostfile 0.0.0.0 primidi.com 0.0.0.0 www.primidi.com 0.0.0.0 radio.weblogs.com
As far as already having been taken in the UK goes here is the list of trademarks on 'Firefox' and here is the Mozilla Foundation's application for a trademark.
There don't seem to be any trademarks pending for the 'Thunderbird' name, most of the existing trademarks are held by the ITC Corporation who own the rights to the Thunderbirds tv show and film. There don't seem to be any covering the same fields as Mozilla Thunderbird though, so it does seem strange that no application has been made.
I think you really mean NCSA Mosaic, not Mozilla.
while true;do echo -e -n "\033[s\n\033[u\134_\033[B";done
There are some whippersnappers too oung even to remember the Pheonix browser *warm memories gloss over my cateract eyes*, then the Firebird... then Firefox.
Lest we forget. Mod up.
Caterects? I am twenty-bloody-five.
I will check out BackRub for some info on Pheonix.
#hostfile 0.0.0.0 primidi.com 0.0.0.0 www.primidi.com 0.0.0.0 radio.weblogs.com
Oh fuck, he's found us out.
Send round the hit squads.
Or the men in white suits, whatever.
Watch this Heartland Institute video
...how difficult this can be. Why don't they just come up with something like Pakcbycovjuch that somebody else doesn't have with 100% certainty.
Ubuntu is a good example. Or then they should try to come up with something that makes people think of the internet when they hear the browser's name. "Firefox" isn't exactly such a name.
Microsoft should completely abandon IE and donate the name to Mozilla, then in return they can include Firefox (now Internet Explorer) maybe slightly modified in Windows with the full support of the Mozilla Foundation, why?
...Ok scrap all that i think it would be best to continue having 4 major browsers (IE, FF, Mac IE & Safari) that clients demand you support and to continue making web design a slow and painful task.
- Most people won't know or care so it would hardly damage Microsoft's reputation, in the tech community it would even give them a boost as a company that does the right thing and embraces the right technology rather than blindly continuing to use outdated crap that doesn't work.
- Firefox is a better browser but it could use some help from Microsoft, possibly with some integration for windows maybe even some speed improvements that could make their way back to the main branch who knows? In any case, the Microsoft branch could be made to look and feel like the old IE so most people wouldn't see a difference - hell they could even disable the pop-up blocker if they wanted!
- CSS and cross browser compatibility would make web developers happy, although probably out of a job because it would now be too easy...
This comment does not represent the views or opinions of the user.
Proposed new name: Microsoft Windows. Oh wait...
--
The last digit of pi is four.
I'm the person at the MoFo responsible for the trademark discussion with Debian. Please read my blog post on the subject to get the correct story.
In Spain there is this company called Fire Fox selling fire extinguishers:
- Original post (in Spanish).
- Original post (Google translated into English).
I'm sorry but how do contract, rules and regulations promote freedom?
The contract and the rules are there to make sure that Debian is completely free forever. If there were no rules, and Debian maintainers could just stick anything in there, Debian would stop being what it is.
Right now, you know that you can grab a disk image of Debian, burn a stack of CDs, and give the CDs to your friends. You know this is legal, because the Debian guys are so careful about license issues.
Remember submarine patents, like MP3? MP3 was used for years in ways that infringed the patent, and people got away with it because the patent wasn't being enforced. Now that MP3 has market share, the patents are being enforced, but Debian wasn't affected because Debian didn't put MP3 in. (At least, not in the "main" section. MP3 software could end up in "nonfree".)
Debian's rules are basically a promise to me, to you, and to everyone that Debian will always be free. So tell me how the rules have "nothing to do with promoting 'freedom'."
Read at Gerv's blog. So much for the quality of ZDNet journalism. :)
This has been debated in debian, and the resolution was to not distribute debian with the original trademark, just the swirl (the other one is with the bottle). See screenshots at: http://shots.osdir.com/slideshows/slideshow.php?re lease=361&slide=41&title=debian+gnu/linux+3.1+scre enshots
The're not making up rules for others they don't abide themselves, MoFo has repeatedly been asked to provide for such an alternative but denied it (for obvious reasons)
Is owned by Triumph Motorcycles both here and in the states. It's licenced to Ford (?) for use on automobiles.
They seem to spend more of their time complaining than anything else.
Why don't we just continue the mythical animal trend and call it 'Puma'...
Or Pegasus... Or... What's the name of that mexican lizard that sucks the blood out of all those goats?
SIMMONS:That'd be the Chupacabra, sir!
Yeah. How about it, Mozilla Foundation? Chupa-thingy. I like it. It's got a nice ring to it.
Edward@Tomato - /home/Edward/ man woman
man: no entry for woman in the manual.
"Qua!?"
1. Mozilla
2. Firebird
3. Firefox
4. ???
5. Profit!!!
It's too sad that such a miopic view of business is so often applied to all the economic field.
Singularity: a belief in the "God" idea with the "demiurge" relation inverted.
One of the Spanish leading manufacturers of fire extinguishers Fire Fox
It's in Google too, much more pleasant to read. Here.
Well Mozilla will have to take on the air force now! And not only do they have great big guns on their planes, they also have the secret to disarm any geek...A woman! http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/06/16/woman.thunderbird /index.html
Professor Karmadillo Songs of Science
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0083943/ Directed by: Clint Eastwood Plot Outline: A pilot is sent into the Soviet Union on a mission to steal a prototype jet fighter that can be partially controlled by a neuralink
"I'm going to f***ing bury that guy, I have done it before, and I will do it again. I'm going to f***ing kill Google"
I am not an IP Specialist but for what I know Registrating a name under a trademark cost hell of a money. Internationnal TM which Firefox should do could cost them more than 15 000$ dollars and trademarked it in the US could cost us about 1 000$ if do it with a n IP firm.
If any specialist could correct me go for it.
haf
No, this really hurts Firefox.
I said "ha ha!"
I have a website. It's about Macs.
To people in the real world, this sounds crazy. To many of us in the geek world, it doesn't sound much saner. Arguing about what is the name of the thing and then what the name of the thing is called simply doesn't matter -- it doesn't make the software less free!
I can still get the code, modify it and distribute my changes. Who cares what I have to call it? This is a mode of embarassing political correctness -- there is a difference between standing on principles, and exploiting those principles to suit a petty and not terribly relevant political agenda. Debian has crossed the line.
Of course, Debian's policies and decisions "have teeth" only to the extent that software is removed from its distributions. That is fine, so far as it goes. However, when its exclusions are deemed incredible, irresponsible or unprincipled, sooner or later, people are going to become more concerneed, first in the real world and later in the geek world as well, about the lack of functionality of the product, and the reasons therefor.
I could care less what these products are called, and what I am privileged to call it. I understand and acknowledge that a reasonable amount of control is required for trademarks to assure that their goodwill is not diminished. I don't understand the objections, particularly since Debian's own guidelines appear to accept this.
In my view, this "debate" is petty and foolish, and it is a recipe for making the marginalization of "free software" advocates easier for those who oppose the movement. Sure, Debian can live without Apple and Mozilla -- but what about the rest of us, who now may be thinking to ourselves, "why should we?"
Debate yourselves into oblivion folks. Nobody understands this, not because they politically disagree with you, but rather because it is senseless.
I'm thinking particularly of Ubuntu. Right now a lot of packages (especially libraries) are auto-imported from Debian unstable, but if Debian keeps splitting off documentation and putting them into non-free it'd be a mess to keep track of.
Michel
Fedora Project Contribut
Sadly, Mozilla Firefox still supports that tag, even in its latest version, 1.0.4.
They increase freedom overall. Would you say the first amendment restricts freedom? After all, it's a rule.
I am trolling
Airwolf.
And how many Firefox mods are there out there?
Just the one. Netscape.
Debian?
That's a whole family of Linux distos.
Firefox has a long way to go before it's ever as free or open. Don't know if they're even letting the community maintain the Seamonkey suite.
I know - they could call it "PostgreSQL". I'm sure that's not taken!
Now before I get modded down, I be to remind whoever might read this that what I am saying is FACT. - bogaboga
I've got one word for you:
Thundercougerfalconbird.
(Blatantly ripping off this guy)
"The dew has clearly fallen with a particularly sickening thud this morning"
IE was never forced on anyone!
Really?? Look at any release of Windows since Win 98 and tell me if any of them don't have IE installed. I also seem to recall a certain Bill Gates saying that it was so engrained with the operating system that it could not be uninstalled. That to me says that even if you're not browsing the web, you still are using IE to some extent and that you have no choice because of its integration. Sounds like the definition of "forced" to me.
They were not open source friendly and certainly not open standards friendly.
Look at how many web pages out there require Internet Explorer because of proprietary ActiveX extentions. So, it's okay if IE requires proprietary code, but Netscape was so incredibly vile when they did the same thing? Also, where did you get the source code to IE? I don't recall Microsoft being open-source friendly either, yet apparently you are giving them a free pass even though there is no IE source code out there that I'm aware of. By the way, IE still is not 100% supportive of open standards either.
Who's being revisionist again?
The Overrated mod is for reversing inappropriate, positive mods, not for voicing disagreement with a post.
It was bundled by ISPs however. AOL browser anyone? It required IE to be installed, and that came included on a separate floppy if I recall correctly. I forget if it was IE 2 or 3. I still have that floppy somewhere around here...
The same thing applies to these trademarks. Firefox (Firesomething lol) has to trademark in order to protect itself from parasitic corporate thugs who would whisk the trademark away and turn around the attack in order to force a name change.
I couldn't think of any company who'd want to take trademarks from open source products... who could it be who would want to do this... hmmmm could it be MICROSOFT?
IE was never forced on anyone! People started downloading it because NS was a big bloated piece of proprietary lock-in FECAL MATTER.
Not really, regular people don't care about proprietary lock in, or fecal matter. The reason IE grabbed big marketshare in the beginning was that it was a programming platform, and it was required by different pieces of software. And so, it came bundled with that software...AOL, Quicken, etc. People started using what was there for them already. Netscape "imploded" when the management decided that they too needed to be a programming platform to survive, and Gecko was born out of the ashes of Netscape 5. But, it was too late at that point, and all over when IE was bundled with Windows.
If you can't think of any Genuine Microsoft Innovations(TM), there you have it.
All this re-naming is getting silly, I suggest they rename Firefox to JAB (just another web browser) and Thunderbird to JAM (just another mail client). That ought to take care of this for a while :)
"I bow to no man" - Riddick
There really are a lot of options...
Revenge of the Creature
Play Misty for me
The Enforcer
The Gauntlet
Sudden Impact
Absolute Power
True Crime
Or my preference, Two Mules for Sister Sara. Which could double as a really cool name for a band.
This is covered as well; If you do this, you are allowed to keep the Debian name but you cannot use the "Official" logo with it. They have a second version for unofficial use.
i.e.: bug fixes, security fixes, addition of (debian) trusted root certificates
Which is to say, at this time it is solely due to MoFo's goodwill (Debian having been granted special--but revokable--exemption) that a Debian security-patched Firefox can still be called Firefox.
The opinion from some people is that this is too restrictive--and worse yet there is no publicised criteria for how to gain such an exemption.
Oh... and projects downstream from Debian do not automatically benefit from the exemption either.
Akarsz Magyar Gentoo fórumot? Akkor
Because "Outlook" certainly sounds like an email client and "Excel" just makes you automatically think of a spreadsheet...
Um, yes, they really do. Outlook is a calendar and scheduling program, in addition to other things. Hence it manages your "outlook," see? Excel works on two levels. The spreadsheet program increases your productivity, hence you excel, plus you connect it to the spreadsheet cells. I think they're really bland names, but they're the kind of thing business people and general users love.
Other examples: Oracle is a repository of knowledge, Quicken speeds up your budgeting, Photoshop allows you to (obviously) work on photos, even Netscape, which isn't a word, suggests traveling through internet vistas. People get degrees to come up with this stuff.
Brendan
P.S. "Cheerios" refers to the "O" shaped pieces of cereal, and suggests that they're a fun and "cheery" way to start the morning.
[insert witty quote here]
People get degrees to come up with this stuff.
:)
Powerpoint? Google?
P.S. "Cheerios" refers to the "O" shaped pieces of cereal, and suggests that they're a fun and "cheery" way to start the morning.
"cheery" "morning"... nope, those words never belong that close together
http://blog.nexusuk.org
Debian said KDE was illegal, and suddenly, KDE's problem become public. That was a necessary step to have it fixed, as it is now. Now, Debian is making GFDL and Mozilla's problems public, maybe Mozilla will not fix it (it is not so harmfull), but you can bet that Debian move will lead to a new GFDL.
Rethinking email
He's right, you know. The browser's merits aside, "Firefox" is an uninspiringly bland, ugly, generic, and all-around shitty name. "Safari" is great (reminds you both of "Surfin' Safari" and the jungle of the internet); "Internet Explorer" is about what you'd expect from Microsoft, but still conveys meaning; "Opera" may be inexplicable but at least it doesn't sound like the brainchild of some 16 year old overclocking suburbanite.
BTW, "Google" is a combination of "go" and "ogle," and indeed the name connotes a sense of looking thanks to its similarity to "goggle." A stroke of genius if you ask me. And PowerPoint is a presentation program that helps you make points. Powerfully, one would hope, but I agree it's a lackluster name (certainly not up to snuff with "Keynote"). Still, it's better than "Firefox."
The "Firefox" trademark has been filed at OHIM.
The application was published on 14/03/2005. According to the regulation, there is a period of 3 months during which anyone can file an opposition before the registration.
The delay expired 3 days ago.
The mark can be considered as "Registered" (provided the registration fee is paid).
Win98 is a long fucking way from the birth of IE. By that time (IE 4.0) Netscape largely did not matter, and my entire fucking point remains. You could *still* download that pile of crap NS 4.x and use it if you wanted. You were not forced to use IE.
Nice logical fallacy there. Just because I say something about one company or browser does *not* mean I imply the opposite for the other.
Look in the mirror. I'm guessing you started using this fashionable Internet thing in '98 or later because you obviously don't realize IE was being shipped with Windows since 1995. No one was complaining then. Maybe because Netscape was so far ahead then that they just didn't need to complain. Once IE caught up to Navigator in terms of features, financial reality hit Netscape hard. They had no plan whatsoever to profit from their enterprise. They would have died if MS was not even there to begin with. It was simply a matter of time. So what do they do? MS was a nice scapegoat for their incompetence. Jim Clark may know how to find good tech and start a business, but he doesn't know a thing about turning a profit or sustaining business. He was cornered out of his prior business, SGI, which I'm sure there was a good reason for it too. Probably the other board members could see the writing on the wall and had to cut him loose, as they seem to be doing okay or at least surviving today.
Dijkstra Considered Dead
I'm glad that Slashdot pointed this out so that someone else can go register these names first.
Nothing (other than Windows95 perhaps) depended on IE when the browser wars were still going on (IE 4.0 and earlier). People actually downloaded IE 4 because they were still using Windows95 and didn't have it. It really was better than Navigator 4.x. In terms of features, speed, and even stability. I was using IE 4 at this time because I really did not care for where Navigator was headed.
Numbers do not lie, either. People were *using* IE more than ever. They could easily have IE simply installed with Quicken or whatever and still download Navigator 4.x, but many did not. And if you think it's because of laziness, you would be wrong. People would upgrade to IE 5 and 6 because they are actually using it and want the newer version. You must recall all the hoopla in just about every PC magazine and the newspapers about the "browser wars." It was always about the user and had nothing to do with dependencies.
No. Netscape was dead long before this time. In reality, they were dead upon release of their 4.x series. They just didn't have the foresight to see it. They had millions of users, but did not figure out a way to exploit that little detail. It is common business sense to not start a business without a business plan. Netscape did just that and suffered the consequences. Something like 1/10th of all new businesses fail and many do for that reason alone. The odds were *always* against Netscape and it had nothing to do with Microsoft.
Don't assume MS has made money on the Internet. I'm sure they really took it in their pocketbook with the entire IE series. The only benefit to MS is they keep users and have a platform for developing Internet-aware apps. The monetary gain MS received from IE would likely not have been enough to sustain Netscape for any period of time. Even the AOL/Time Warner conglomerate is having trouble making sense of what Netscape should be.
Dijkstra Considered Dead
... about a year ago.
So first it was: Phoenix.
Then it became: Firebird.
Now, it's: Firefox.
So let's see. In a few weeks it will become: Starfox.
Then:
StarCastle, StarChild, StarTrek, StarWars, CoreWars, CoreDump, RageDump, SpeedBump, SpeedFreak, PhonePhreak, PhoneCall, BootyCall, RollCall, RolePlay, DoublePlay, StrikeOut, StrikeForce, DeltaForce, DeltaVee, SpeedingTicket, RecklessDriving, DrunkAndDisorderly, AssaultAndBattery, AlkalineBattery, DoubleABattery, DCell, FuelCell, JailCell, JailBreak, JailBird, StoolPigeon,
SafeCracker, BankRobber, BankVault, PoleVault, PolePosition, FishingPole, FlagPole, FlagStaff
and, ultimately, Phoenix.
You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Debian is a linux distribution that consists of tweaked and patched software fitted together into a coherent system. Their standard practice is to make slight changes (bug fixes, security fixes, et al) to software to make it fit their system and their quality expectations.
Mozilla Firefox's trademark clause does not allow *any* changes (no bug fixes, no security patches, can't fix a single misspelled menu item and still call the result Firefox afterwards).
Accordingly, Debian can then either:
a) not include Firefox
b) call it something else (that users will not be familiar with)
c) submit code to Mozilla Foundation even for utterly trivial things, even for wholly Debian specific things of no interest to anyone else... and *WAIT* until someone at MoFo incorporates their change (or doesn't)
d) accept that on a whim Debian is *for now* granted ad-hoc exception to the rules (which may later be revoked... did BitKeeper teach people anything about revokable rights?)
e) find some way of getting MoFo to change policies
Instead of making dumb comparisons that only a Slashdot moderator could dub insightful; they decided to have a serious discussion on the issue.
e) b) and d) are the favoured solutions thus far in that order or in this order: e) d) and b) depending on who you ask.
Mind you Debian actually has somewhat flexible and clearly document rules regarding their logo (which is "trademark stuff"--is it not?) as opposed to MoFo's "you can use it if we feel like excepting you from our trademark clause" approach: http://www.debian.org/logos/
Akarsz Magyar Gentoo fórumot? Akkor
Actually it was Redhat (as in GNOME) who first declared KDE to be illegal. Only Debian believed them. Everyone else who looked at the issue dismissed the fearmongering.
But the damage has been done. Even as recently as two months ago Debian was on the kde-core mailing list claiming that the QPL was no longer a Free license, despite RMS' assurances that it is.
Don't blame me, I didn't vote for either of them!
And then it will be "that Prince-themed browser"
Actually, yes.
:-p
Running IE on wine for me doesn't cut it
-- I was raised on the command line, bitch
I couldn't have said it better myself.
I've thought about it a little, and the difference is that the commercial software packages have names that appeal to the customers, while projects like this have names that are targeted mainly to the developers. "Firefox" was a last minute name change reminiscent of phoenix. "Phoenix" was Mozilla rising again from ashes. "Mozilla" was the internal project name for Netscape, and it was referring to a killer, godzilla-like form of Mosaic. I can't remember about Mosaic.
These names make sense when you follow the history, and they give some drive to the developer team, but when shown to regular people it just founds funny and confusing. Firefox is doing pretty well anyway, but a more serious name would really help with credibility.
[insert witty quote here]
While IE certainly proliferated quickly, in most cases that wasn't because of an explicit decision by each consumer to download it as some new thing that hadn't been there before and then take the trouble to install it and learn how to use it.
Most people got IE already installed with their operating system, and they got that with the computer they purchased. Their ISP software may have included it in a bundle in some cases. Just having IE should not be interpreted as a statement of preference.
The name "explorer" is found in a lot of other products, but we see no trademark issues for some reason... Maybe FF should be called "Internet Firefox," that is, unless someone owns a trademark for "Internet," or for the space between words. :)
Fuck you, troll mod!
That felt good to say.
The Overrated mod is for reversing inappropriate, positive mods, not for voicing disagreement with a post.
FireBird->FireFox->FireWolf->FireLion->FireApe->Fi reMan->FireWoman->???