Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Stallman Unsure Whether Firefox Is Truly Free

Posted by CmdrTaco on from the more-left-than-left dept.

Slatterz writes "Among the theories Stallman bandies about in this Q&A are: Facebook may not share private data with the CIA, Firefox isn't really 'free software,' and his dreams of a day where nobody is involved in developing or promoting proprietary software. Agree or disagree?"

4 of 905 comments (clear)

  1. He doesn't say Firefox isn't really free software by chrb · · Score: 5, Informative

    He in fact says:

    Firefox is a strange case, since initially the sources were free software but the binaries released by the Mozilla Foundation were not free. They were non-free for two reasons: they included one non-free module, Talkback, for which sources were not available (even to the Mozilla Foundation); and because they carried a restrictive EULA [end-user licence agreement].

    I think these two problems have both been corrected, so maybe the distributed Firefox binaries are free software today.

  2. That is easy by DVega · · Score: 5, Informative

    It is not. The Firefox logo is not free. Thus, any software that includes that logo is non-free also, and Debian developers know it very well

    --
    MOD THE CHILD UP!
  3. Re:Leave Stallman alone *sobs* by jonbryce · · Score: 5, Informative

    He's said in the past that he doesn't have a problem with Trademarks as long as it is easy to remove them.

    It's all part of the idea that you should make it clear that you modified the program so that the original programmer's reputation isn't harmed by any bugs you introduce.

  4. Re:People scoffed at my contention... by chrb · · Score: 5, Informative

    "You can even be a programmer. Most paid programmers are developing custom software--only a small fraction are developing non-free software. The small fraction of proprietary software jobs are not hard to avoid." Richard Stallman

    "Programmers could develop custom software by day, develop general purpose free software for fun. Or pay people for developing free software. Or sell support, or copies of free software." Richard Stallman

    It seems RMS fully supports the idea of paid software development. I wonder why so many people think differently - poor reporting, or just personal bias?