I read the point made on osnews forum about the change. The claim is that since the Firefox logo is trademarked, it is not-free.
The original story is incorrect. The Firefox (tm) logo is not available under a DFSG-compatible license. Therefore Debian can not distribute it. Mozilla.com insists that because Debian does not use the official logo, it also may not use the official name. Debian complies. All else is typical meaningless and ill-informed Internet debate.
As for your Linux example: the Linux trademark is irrelevant until Linus enforces it against Debian. When that happens, Debian will rename (or drop) the linux-image packages.
Could you try mozilla.com's official Firefox (tm) builds and see if they also crash? If they don't, could you please file a bug report? You can do this by running 'reportbug mozilla-firefox'.
PS, there is no fight or conflict. mozilla.com asked Debian to either start using the Firefox logo, or stop using the Firefox name. Debian is complying.
Free software is about freedom. The exact method by which a user's freedom is restricted (be it copyright, patent, trademark, DRM or another issue) is irrelevant.
And the browser is referred to as "Firefox"? It will be interesting to see what Mandriva's reaction will be when mozilla.com make them change the name, as they have done with Debian.
Now, we finally agree! This issue has been totally blown out of proportion on Slashdot and in other places. And the amount of mis-informed comments posted to this story is so depressing.:(
If the software in a distribution can not be freely altered then it is not free. Restrictions come in many forms. Copyrights are the one we are most familiar with. Debian usually ignores patent and trademark problems until a patent or trademark owner raises the issue; this is what is happening in this case.
This is not a political issue. Mozilla will sue Debian unless Debian changes the name of its Firefox package!
As for your SATA issues, I suggest that you do an iota of research before splashing out on new hardware. Making sure that hardware is capable of running the software you want to run on it is always a good idea; after all, the hardware only exists to run your chosen software--it should not dictate that choice itself.
Finally, next time you need help with Debian I suggest you use one of the known support channels. Off-topic bitching on an un-related internet forum just makes you look like you are trolling.:)
7. If, as a consequence of a court judgment or allegation of patent infringement or for any other reason (not limited to patent issues), conditions are imposed on you (whether by court order, agreement or otherwise) that contradict the conditions of this License, they do not excuse you from the conditions of this License. If you cannot distribute so as to satisfy simultaneously your obligations under this License and any other pertinent obligations, then as a consequence you may not distribute the Program at all.
The best way for the user to use "Firefox (tm)" is to get it from mozilla.com. After all, making sure that the user gets an "official" build of Firefox is what this entire debate is about!
This is a user freedom issue. Don't you realise that by using the Firefox name and logo to misrepresent a piece of software that is not Firefox as Firefox, you are opening yourself up to a trademark lawsuit? Not to mention the copyright voilation (the Firefox logo is not available under DFSG-free terms, that is the reason that Debian can not agree to Mozilla's terms and use it in the first place!)
The Debian people are not making a stink about this. If you bothered to read the original bug report you would have seen that Mozilla raised the issue and Mozilla is threatening to sue Debian if they don't come into compliance with their trademark usage policies. Why do you think that Debian would not be harmed if Mozilla sued them for voilating their trademarks?
Surely "normal" people would just use Internet Explorer on Windows?:)
Debian can not do as you suggest because your solution ignores the problem's copyright dimension. All material in Debian must be available under DFSG-compatible terms. Debian can not use the Firefox logo because it is not licensed under such terms. The logo problem is purely a copyright issue. The trademark dimension does not come into it; even if the logo was not trademarked, the copyright issue prevents Debian from using it.
Where trademarks enter the picture is with the 'Firefox' name. mozilla.com says "thou shalt not use the name without the logo". Because Debian can not use the logo, they are also prevented from using the name.
Now, traditionally Debian has only cared about copyright issues. The Project's approach to patents and trademarks is to ignore potential violations until the patent/trademark owner presses the issue. I consider this sensible because Debian is a volunteer project with extremley limited resources. If the Debian Developers had to audit the packages that comprise Debian for alleged patent and trademark violations then there would be to time left over for them to actually get anything done! Now, since mozilla.com has pressed the issue, Debian has two options:
1. Use the Firefox logo (would require all current patches and future patches to be approved by mozilla.com) 2. Stop using the trademarked 'Firefox' name.
Option 1 is not acceptable because Debian can not use the non-DFSG-free logo. (The possibility that Mozilla may not approve patches necessary for Firefox to correctly function in the Debian operating system, and may delay (or prevent entirely) the release of security updates for the firefox package is irrelevant). Therefore, Debian chooses option 2.
What will be interesting is to see whether other distributions that have similar requirements (such as Fedora and Gentoo) are also forced to change the name of Firefox in their packages.
Actually, Debian is the party that's shirking legal responsibility. It's not like Mozilla just rewrote their trademark policy.
If you bothered to actually read the original bug report you would know that Mozilla did just change their policy. They just rescinded the agreement reached by the Debian package maintainers and Gervase Markham that allowed Debian to use the name 'Firefox' without having to submit all their patches for approval, and without having to use the (non-DFSG-free) Firefox logo.
Debian is brain-damaged on this issue and either needs to change trademark law (oh, and while they're at it, fix patent law), or else cope with copyrighted logos.
Debian cope with copyrighted logos in the same way that they treat any copyrighted work: if the work is not available under terms compatible with the Debian Free Software Guidelines, they don't include it in the Debian distribution.
What else would you have them do?
Would you have Greenpeace get into the oil business because it is more profitable than what they currently do?
That's funny. I don't see any bug from Mozilla developers. It would be nice if they at least tried to bring problematic patches to the attention of the maintainers of the mozilla-related packages... but I guess making snarky comments on an IRC channel is less effort.
It is not that simple an issue. One of Debian's best attributes is the fact that everything in Debian complies to the DFSG. This means that I don't have to bother reading the/usr/share/doc/$package/copyright file of every package I install; I know that I may freely modify and distribute everything.
I think it is in my best interest (as a user) that Debian alter its package so that mozilla.com can no longer prevent me from doing so; therefore rebranding the Firefox browser (or even renaming the package, if necessary) is in the best interest of the user.
Slashdot Mirror
As for your Linux example: the Linux trademark is irrelevant until Linus enforces it against Debian. When that happens, Debian will rename (or drop) the linux-image packages.
Could you try mozilla.com's official Firefox (tm) builds and see if they also crash? If they don't, could you please file a bug report? You can do this by running 'reportbug mozilla-firefox'.
PS, there is no fight or conflict. mozilla.com asked Debian to either start using the Firefox logo, or stop using the Firefox name. Debian is complying.
Free software is about freedom. The exact method by which a user's freedom is restricted (be it copyright, patent, trademark, DRM or another issue) is irrelevant.
Users will continue to click on the (unlabelled) blue world icon to start a web browser, just as they have always done.
Please tell them how the newbies managed to find the actual Debian cd images so that the procedure can be revised to be made more difficult. ;)
And the browser is referred to as "Firefox"? It will be interesting to see what Mandriva's reaction will be when mozilla.com make them change the name, as they have done with Debian.
Could you please file a bug for that?
You asked, "What the hell is up with the stupid logo [Ubuntu] use for Firefox?". The bug report answers.
Now, we finally agree! This issue has been totally blown out of proportion on Slashdot and in other places. And the amount of mis-informed comments posted to this story is so depressing. :(
http://fuckinggoogleit.com/search?q=ubuntu+firefox +trademark
If the software in a distribution can not be freely altered then it is not free. Restrictions come in many forms. Copyrights are the one we are most familiar with. Debian usually ignores patent and trademark problems until a patent or trademark owner raises the issue; this is what is happening in this case.
This is not a political issue. Mozilla will sue Debian unless Debian changes the name of its Firefox package!
:)
As for your SATA issues, I suggest that you do an iota of research before splashing out on new hardware. Making sure that hardware is capable of running the software you want to run on it is always a good idea; after all, the hardware only exists to run your chosen software--it should not dictate that choice itself.
If this is not possible then I suggest you try one of Kenshi Muto's Backported d-i images, or a backported kernel from backports.org.
Finally, next time you need help with Debian I suggest you use one of the known support channels. Off-topic bitching on an un-related internet forum just makes you look like you are trolling.
I think it's already covered.
7. If, as a consequence of a court judgment or allegation of patent infringement or for any other reason (not limited to patent issues), conditions are imposed on you (whether by court order, agreement or otherwise) that contradict the conditions of this License, they do not excuse you from the conditions of this License. If you cannot distribute so as to satisfy simultaneously your obligations under this License and any other pertinent obligations, then as a consequence you may not distribute the Program at all.
The best way for the user to use "Firefox (tm)" is to get it from mozilla.com. After all, making sure that the user gets an "official" build of Firefox is what this entire debate is about!
This is a user freedom issue. Don't you realise that by using the Firefox name and logo to misrepresent a piece of software that is not Firefox as Firefox, you are opening yourself up to a trademark lawsuit? Not to mention the copyright voilation (the Firefox logo is not available under DFSG-free terms, that is the reason that Debian can not agree to Mozilla's terms and use it in the first place!)
The Debian people are not making a stink about this. If you bothered to read the original bug report you would have seen that Mozilla raised the issue and Mozilla is threatening to sue Debian if they don't come into compliance with their trademark usage policies. Why do you think that Debian would not be harmed if Mozilla sued them for voilating their trademarks?
Surely "normal" people would just use Internet Explorer on Windows? :)
Debian can not do as you suggest because your solution ignores the problem's copyright dimension. All material in Debian must be available under DFSG-compatible terms. Debian can not use the Firefox logo because it is not licensed under such terms. The logo problem is purely a copyright issue. The trademark dimension does not come into it; even if the logo was not trademarked, the copyright issue prevents Debian from using it.
Where trademarks enter the picture is with the 'Firefox' name. mozilla.com says "thou shalt not use the name without the logo". Because Debian can not use the logo, they are also prevented from using the name.
Now, traditionally Debian has only cared about copyright issues. The Project's approach to patents and trademarks is to ignore potential violations until the patent/trademark owner presses the issue. I consider this sensible because Debian is a volunteer project with extremley limited resources. If the Debian Developers had to audit the packages that comprise Debian for alleged patent and trademark violations then there would be to time left over for them to actually get anything done! Now, since mozilla.com has pressed the issue, Debian has two options:
1. Use the Firefox logo (would require all current patches and future patches to be approved by mozilla.com)
2. Stop using the trademarked 'Firefox' name.
Option 1 is not acceptable because Debian can not use the non-DFSG-free logo. (The possibility that Mozilla may not approve patches necessary for Firefox to correctly function in the Debian operating system, and may delay (or prevent entirely) the release of security updates for the firefox package is irrelevant). Therefore, Debian chooses option 2.
What will be interesting is to see whether other distributions that have similar requirements (such as Fedora and Gentoo) are also forced to change the name of Firefox in their packages.
Probably just idiots bleating the mozilla.com party line that Debian "forked" xulrunner...
What else would you have them do?
Would you have Greenpeace get into the oil business because it is more profitable than what they currently do?
That's funny. I don't see any bug from Mozilla developers. It would be nice if they at least tried to bring problematic patches to the attention of the maintainers of the mozilla-related packages... but I guess making snarky comments on an IRC channel is less effort.
It is not that simple an issue. One of Debian's best attributes is the fact that everything in Debian complies to the DFSG. This means that I don't have to bother reading the /usr/share/doc/$package/copyright file of every package I install; I know that I may freely modify and distribute everything.
I think it is in my best interest (as a user) that Debian alter its package so that mozilla.com can no longer prevent me from doing so; therefore rebranding the Firefox browser (or even renaming the package, if necessary) is in the best interest of the user.
Looks like the GNU project have already started a branch of Moizlla called Gnuzilla: http://www.gnu.org/software/gnuzilla/
At least it launches the right programs to deal with downloaded files :)
http://linux.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=198447&c id=16260281