Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

UK Government Confiscates Firefox CDs

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the can't-just-give-it-away dept.

Alsee writes "The idea that Free Software can be sold has some government officials perplexed. Times Online has the story. A UK Trading Standards officer contacted the Mozilla Foundation to report catching a business selling copies of Firefox. The organization confiscated the CDs with the intent to prosecute said business. When informed that such distribution was authorized, the officer first expressed disbelief that Free Software could be sold then said 'If Mozilla permit the sale of copied versions of its software, it makes it virtually impossible for us, from a practical point of view, to enforce UK anti-piracy legislation'."

6 of 540 comments (clear)

  1. Licenses by eldavojohn · · Score: 5, Informative
    Some of the licenses allow for people to charge for distributing the software. After all, they burned it to a disc and probably did all the labeling. You're paying for nothing more than the time and resources that went into this. Is it wrong to charge $10 per CD with Mozilla on it? Probably, but I don't think it's illegal. You simply have to disclose that there is no warranty and state that the software falls under the MPL.

    As Section 3.5 states:
    You must duplicate the notice in Exhibit A in each file of the Source Code. If it is not possible to put such notice in a particular Source Code file due to its structure, then You must include such notice in a location (such as a relevant directory) where a user would be likely to look for such a notice. If You created one or more Modification(s) You may add your name as a Contributor to the notice described in Exhibit A. You must also duplicate this License in any documentation for the Source Code where You describe recipients' rights or ownership rights relating to Covered Code. You may choose to offer, and to charge a fee for, warranty, support, indemnity or liability obligations to one or more recipients of Covered Code. However, You may do so only on Your own behalf, and not on behalf of the Initial Developer or any Contributor. You must make it absolutely clear than any such warranty, support, indemnity or liability obligation is offered by You alone, and You hereby agree to indemnify the Initial Developer and every Contributor for any liability incurred by the Initial Developer or such Contributor as a result of warranty, support, indemnity or liability terms You offer.
    Do not confuse the MPL with the GPL, folks.
    'If Mozilla permit the sale of copied versions of its software, it makes it virtually impossible for us, from a practical point of view, to enforce UK anti-piracy legislation.'
    Well, Mozilla falls under the MPL. I'm not sure any other software falls under this license. For that reason, anyone distributing software that falls under other licenses should be investigated. I'm not sure how people distributing Mozilla legally at a charge prohibits you from arresting people who are distributing copyrighted software which they made their own copies of.
    --
    My work here is dung.
    1. Re:Licenses by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      You can charge for GPL'd software also. The important thing is the freedom to review and edit the way the program works, not the fact that GPL software is TYPICALLY, BUT NOT ALWAYS, distributed for free.

      In that respect, it's no different than the MPL or the multitude of similar open source licenses ou there.

    2. Re:Licenses by albalbo · · Score: 4, Informative

      You can, so long as it's the original. If you modify the software, you have to rebuild it without the branding, unless you have MoFo's permission.

      --
      "Elmo knows where you live!" - The Simpsons
    3. Re:Licenses by drakaan · · Score: 4, Informative
      The IANAL comment saves you on this one. Trademark prevents another company making another product from confusing customers by using your mark.

      If they were distributing a different browser and calling it Mozilla or Firefox then they'd run afoul of trademark law. What's at issue here is copyright, which is added to by the MPL that explicitly allows for copying.

      The fact that the cops can't comprehend what's allowed via the MPL is humorous, as is their failure to understand how it relates to copyright with no additional permissive license.

      --
      "Murphy was an optimist" - O'Toole's commentary on Murphy's Law
  2. submitter: RTFA by l2718 · · Score: 5, Informative

    The blurb is highly misleading. No CDs were confiscated. Rather, the officer did the right thing: upon uncountering the "suspicious" distributor, he first contacted the copyright owner (the Mozilla Foundation) to ask what gives. In particular, no confiscated CDs had to be returned.

    As another poster above points out, the Trading Standards Office should have been able to figure this out by reading the license, but you cannot fault them for going to the people who licensed the software initialy.

    1. Re:submitter: RTFA by leuk_he · · Score: 4, Informative

      Well, reading the licence on the cd should not believed. Hypothacally I would be able to create a cd containing Oracle and stamp a gpl licence notification on it. Am i allowed to distribute it then.I do not think so. So the lady was correct.

      The other way arround happens also by the way. Some gpl software gets retagged by someone who thinks he can getaway with it. You cannot sell that one because you do not have a valid licence for the software. (even if you say you have. )