Slashdot Log In
Mozilla vs Debian Analyzed
Posted by
CmdrTaco
on Tue Oct 10, 2006 05:30 PM
from the me-no-mine-no-me dept.
from the me-no-mine-no-me dept.
lisah writes "Linux.com has a behind the scenes look at the history of the ongoing debates between Debian and Mozilla that predate Debian's last release, Sarge. The article also reports the issue may have been laid to rest for good now that Debian tentatively plans on calling it "Iceweasel" but attorney Larry Rosen said this never should have been a debate in the first place. In addition, Mozilla has been prompted to clarify its position on the company's marketing blog."
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Iceweasel? (Score:4, Insightful)
Someone around here has a sig that says something like, "letting a programmer name your product is like making a marketer program it." Never before has it been demonstrated so clearly. (Well, to be fair, at least the browser isn't Gimped.)
Re:Iceweasel? (Score:5, Informative)
(http://www.hyperborea.org/journal/ | Last Journal: Tuesday September 11, @05:30PM)
The "problem" was that Debian didn't want to use this switch and go the unofficial route. Instead, they wrote a patch that would mix-and-match the official name with the unofficial icons and logos. Mozilla, having consulted their lawyers, said "Wait, you can't do that! It has to be one way or the other." They went back and forth, and finally Debian settled on going all unofficial.
Re:Iceweasel? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Iceweasel? (Score:5, Informative)
Matt Groening - Love is ... (Score:5, Informative)
- Matt Groening
Simpsons, Futurama, Life in Hell
Re:Matt Groening - Love is ... (Score:4, Interesting)
...except you forgot to add that this quote was meant to express Nietzsche's take on love, and not in some mythical book called "Life in Hell"--which was a late revision of multiple sources, not entirely unlike the Bible or the U.S. Constitution in that regard--but in "Love is Hell," which preceded the other "...is Hell" books. Special +1 Informatives for anyone who can list the other philosophers whose theories of life were discussed on this same page of "Love is Hell." (I can't actually remember, but I think one was Kierkegaard.)
Summary (Score:5, Informative)
Debian don't want to include certain icons related to Firefox because the licensing of those graphics isn't consistent with the aims of their project.
Mozilla say that's fine, as long as Debian don't call the package "Firefox".
So Debian aren't going to call it Firefox.
No villains, and everyone lives hapily ever after. The end.
Re:Summary (Score:4, Insightful)
(Last Journal: Monday October 15, @02:45PM)
A lot of this comes down to "what's in a name"? Personally, I see Debian's position as more proper within the realm of the F/OSS community. If you toute your program as open source, yet say that if anyone makes any changes to the program that you do not approve of, that they cannot use your trademark, then that certainly doesn't sound "open" and "free" to me. Especially, if your source contains all of the trademark data in the code, and altering the content requires a great deal of work.
When you come down to it, it's the same situation as I have with Windows XP. "Oh, of course you OWN the CD, you bought it. But you're only LICENSING the data on it." They hide all this un-free double plus ungood behind telling you that you're free to do whatever you want, so long as you don't screw with them.
If a program is released as free/open source under the GPL, or BSD, or any license for that matter, but contains artwork inside of it that is restricted, then that's absurd, and retarded! I'm sorry that I have to take a Stallman approach to this issue, but it's stupid to have Copyleft and Trademark compete against each other...
Let's all trade our freedom of IP expression for the shackles of another IP prison!
Re:Summary (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't know what kind of patches Debian is applying, but they must not be trivial, if Mozilla wants to approve them before allowing distribution with their name and artwork.
The Mozilla foundation laid all of this out a long time ago. Debian knew the terms when they began using Firefox. They're free to agree to the terms or not use it.
Re:Summary (Score:5, Insightful)
(http://people.xiph.org/~jm/)
I think it's not that much about the logo as it is about other changes Debian makes.
No villains, and everyone lives hapily ever after. The end.
Sure, everyone is technically in their right. However, Mozilla is being very much of a pain in the ass. Can you imagine how life would be for distros if GNOME decided it doesn't get called GNOME unless it's the official GNOME release (no modifications)? And then KDE could do the same, along with X.Org, OpenOffice.org,
Re:Summary (Score:5, Interesting)
Yes, I can imagine it.
It would fucking ROCK.
Being able to assume that "GNOME 2.10" really is "GNOME 2.10" everywhere, and not "GNOME 2.10 plus some stuff that I thought might cool and without the stuff I thought I didn't need"... well, it would make life a lot simpler for app developers.
Re:Summary (Score:4, Insightful)
(http://people.xiph.org/~jm/)
It would fucking ROCK.
Being able to assume that "GNOME 2.10" really is "GNOME 2.10" everywhere, and not "GNOME 2.10 plus some stuff that I thought might cool and without the stuff I thought I didn't need"... well, it would make life a lot simpler for app developers.
You're getting it wrong here. It would mean that Debian would have "TROLL 2.10 plus some stuff that I thought might cool and without the stuff I thought I didn't need", and RedHat would have "EMONG 2.10 plus some stuff that I thought might cool and without the stuff I thought I didn't need" and so on. Distribution are *integrators*, they can't just ship everything unmodified (they'd all be the same otherwise). (Most) People want something polished where apps fit together and all.
Re:Summary (Score:5, Interesting)
(http://40hex.net/)
I agree with the rest of your statement, though, and I do think that this business is a big waste of developer time and effort. Now it is really more difficult to comply adequately, depending on the nature and volume of Debian's patches.
If one were to invite prognostication from me, I'd say that this sort of response will grow, as Mozilla Corporation flexes it's muscle over trademark enforcement. I'd guess that Debian, Ubuntu, and any other distro striving to be truly free, will probably do something like perform conditions 1 and 3 anyway (publicly submit patches w/descriptions, as well as tag their divergent branch), will probably exert the GPL and use whatever build time configurations they think are best, and lastly, come up with their own artwork and graphics.
That will further their goal of using & distributing free, high-quality software (without non-free strings attached to binary data included in the final product) to their users. My guess is that creative icon-ing will make this change remarkeably less noticeable to end users. After all, there is no reason that iceweasel (et. al.) couldn't use the same (or similar) versioning and advertise itself as being 'firefox compatible' as far as extensions & page rendering go. Not to mention, that I seriously doubt it would be a violation of trademark to install a 'firefox', or 'mozilla-firefox' symbolic link (in a very
On the side of Mozilla Corp., they will either decide that this dilutes the brand, and just bend to unify everyone, or they won't care and will drop strictly-all-free sorts of GNU/Linux distributions, assuming that the market share they bring is minimal.
And that will be that. Just my guess, anyway. If Mozilla Corp is smart, they'll exclude the user-agent string from trademark issues so that at least usage statistics will show a unified product, rather ruining firefox's growing usage statistics rank in a schism.
Really sad... (Score:1)
(Last Journal: Friday October 06 2006, @06:40PM)
Re:Really sad... (Score:5, Insightful)
(Last Journal: Friday November 09, @04:36PM)
There is no dispute.
Mozilla doesn't want programs called "Firefox" to diverge too much from the original. Debian wants to make some changes that go beyond what the Mozilla group are happy calling "Firefox". So they've taken option #2 and renamed it.
It's just a choice. It's the choice both are happy with. Why it keeps being portrayed as some kind of war is beyond me.
Re:Really sad... (Score:4, Insightful)
It's fairly simple:
Probably, but what'd happen if someone rebuilt a whole Debian without including the (non-free) debian logo? Because that's what'd be equivalent to the situation between Debian and MozCo
(1): the Debian logo is non-free though, and this is considered a bug by the way
PS: this post was written with Mozilla Sunbeaver
I prefer "WaterVole" (Score:3, Interesting)
Why iceweasel? (Score:2, Insightful)
(http://www.daduh.org/ | Last Journal: Friday July 20, @11:20AM)
Debian needs to relax (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:It is a BIG Deal (Score:4, Interesting)
(http://www.friendwich.com/ | Last Journal: Thursday November 09 2006, @12:05PM)
If the unauthorized use of logos were not prosecuted by a company I could do lots of fun things. For example, I could repackage the gimp, throw photoshop's splash image in it and call it photoshopper. Maybe the name of my company would be AdobeHut too. Better still, I'll put a "circle R" next to all of it and make it look official.
If Adobe doesn't throw every last lawyer at me, then lots of other people could do it. The courts would see it as essentially public domain. Meanwhile, I can drag Adobe into court for using my logo. Crazy right?
Both parties are doing the right thing here. I doubt it really consumed very much time/energy on the part of the project as these kinds of details must be addressed and that's about it.
Stories like this tend to make a figurative fire where there is none.
Absurdity (Score:3, Insightful)
This would be like changing the name of the distribution to Dumbo GMAC/Looney and wondering why Disney and GM are sending you C&D letters, while Linus sends you an angry e-mail asking that you respect his trademark. It's free software, we can call it anything we want, and you are free to modify it! While technically true, that doesn't get anyone anywhere.
To Debian: We don't live in a black and white world. Please find another academic circular argument, and let this one go.
Iceweasel? (Score:4, Insightful)
Oh well, Ubuntu already has things worked out with Firefox, so no naming games going on there. Debian should note well that sometimes downstreams do take over when the parent project became too onerous to work with. No one is too big for this to happen.
Ubuntu status and IceWeasel Icon (Score:3, Interesting)
(http://www.hyperborea.org/journal/ | Last Journal: Tuesday September 11, @05:30PM)
Anyone know what's up with Ubuntu? Are they going to pull official Firefox releases, or are they going to pull IceWeasel straight from Debian?
IceWeasel Icon - Direct Link (Score:4, Informative)
(http://www.hyperborea.org/journal/ | Last Journal: Tuesday September 11, @05:30PM)
Why not TurboRabbitChaser? or FoxOnFire? (Score:1)
(http://robmarkovic.com/ | Last Journal: Monday July 28 2003, @01:09AM)
There's so much respect in the air..
How about people realizing the problem and finding a solution that will keep the name from changing yet again. Or just leave it out in non-free and have a meta package take care of it..
Debian could also switch to Kmeleon as it's less memory hungry.
The problem is at Moz's end (Score:4, Informative)
(http://www.whiteboxlinux.org/)
I already made the change earlier in the year. Done right FF plugins still work so no big deal.
Community Edition (Score:3, Interesting)
(http://arc.nucapt.northwestern.edu/F/OSS)
This policy seems to be a good fit--Debian MUST NOT include the image which is under a non-DFSG copyright to conform to this policy (they don't want to and currently don't include it, but the NEW "standard trademark policy" is that it must be used if the Firefox name is used). And they must rename it "Firefox Community Edition, Debian." This seems preferable to Ice Weasel for both the majority of Debian users and Mozilla's image. OpenBSD already follows this policy, as do others. If the CEP is ever dropped, there will be many more distros who will be forced to switch to "Ice Weasel."
It going to go down the wire and then be settled (Score:1)
I for one didn't know a new debian was due out, did you?
I know theres a new firefox due but not everyone does.
Or am I being too cynical?
Shades of GPL3? (Score:3, Interesting)
Looks like Debian is getting burned by its own arrogance.
The GPL-3 allows the copywrite holder to place certain restrictions on the licensee's use of the software, for instance no military/weapons use (don't like your stuff being used; Freedom's a biach isn't it). Restrictions on what parts of the code the use may or may not change; requiring links to download the source be maintained.
Now they being hit, once again, by restrictions the copywrite holders are placing on the distribution: if you distribute software that we own the copywrite to, you must maintain our branding. Sounds reasonable, the application is called Firefox and the logos and branding are part of the application; after all the copywrite holder does have the right to say what's part of application, (certain exceptions may apply in the case of illegal monopolies, and fraudlent activities). The usage restrictions also don't seem out of line with Debain's official logo usage.
http://www.debian.org/logos/ [debian.org]Looks like the Mozilla Foundation is pretty much in line with the Debian usage here.
So the Debian developers are free to change the code however they want, but they can't call it Firefox and they can't use the Firefox logos.
Appropriate summary (Score:1, Funny)
Mozilla vs Debian Anal
Sounds like it sums everything up right there.
I for one (Score:2)
What's the big deal with the name? Anyone that needs to recognize it mostly just clicks on the internet icon (thingy). Anyone else can just look and will find it. Besides, I never liked the sound of the Firefox name anyways. Iceweasel sounds so much cooler (literally, as a matter of fact).
It's all about the trademark (Score:4, Insightful)
(http://rtfm.insomnia.org/~qg/ | Last Journal: Wednesday November 16 2005, @07:11AM)
Yeah, so? That's the problem. You're not supposed to be like any other company. You're supposed to care about freedom.
Don't forget firebird (Score:2)
Firefox was once called Firebird but renamed due to the "other" firebird which was a db.
Firebird, Phoenix, DCC... (Score:4, Informative)
(http://www.hyperborea.org/journal/ | Last Journal: Tuesday September 11, @05:30PM)
And Debian's been on both sides, too, when they forced the DCC to drop "Debian" [linux-watch.com] (originally it was the "Debian Common Core Alliance.")
Iceweasel (Score:2, Insightful)
So can I use the name "Debian" freely, then? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:So can I use the name "Debian" freely, then? (Score:4, Funny)
Issue is larger than Debian, its about the GPL (Score:1, Interesting)
In fact, Mozilla has modified the text of the MPL, which now has a new preamble which states "You are not granted rights or licenses to the trademarks of the Mozilla Foundation or any party, including without limitation the Firefox name or logo." This is a new modification to the MPL and is not reflected in the version of the license available on the Mozilla website. Furthermore, this version of the license has not been analysed by the GNU project, and might not be compatable with the GPL.
It is a RED HERRING to argue that trademark and copyright law offer a distinction in this case. If you release source code that contains image files which are licensed under the GPL, they are licensed under the GPL. If you release it under them under a tri-license, then they are tri-licensed. If you pick and choose which parts of your source code are GPL or MPL, then, well, you have a problem with compliance.
This is a serious LEGAL issue, not a moral issue. IMHO, all distros which are distributed under the GPL should stop using the MPL until they consult legal counsel!
As a sort-of-almost-not-quite-yet sdk (Score:5, Insightful)
(http://www.josephguhlin.com/blog/)
Now, pretend for a minute Debian had Firefox with that name and the regular icons. But they decided, for whatever reason, to roll back or use their own GC patch for the problem we had.
So, my app wouldn't work on Firefox, but would work on Firefox? Specifically, not on Debian FF but in the rest of the world? Any idea how inane this is? Firefox is trying to protect a brand of quality, if debian introduces a new bug into their browser, should Moz provide support? Should other people provide support in IRC, newsgroups, etc.. ?
What if I modified python to not use if anymore but use wellmaybeiwillonlyif instead, but released it, called it Python, same version, etc... should I be allowed to do so? Could I then say that python from python.org is not compatible with Python from python.org, which I should then call the unofficial branch?
Yeah, it's silly, but if I'm an OS, that's a lot of implementations of it that no longer support "if".
Oh good grief Mozilla guys! (Score:3, Insightful)
(http://www.sjbaker.org/)
Look - FireFox is OpenSourced - right? So for chrissakes let them
do what they want with it - that is THE ENTIRE POINT!!! If the
Debian guys (who are not exactly complete Klutzes at this stuff)
mess up, you say "Hey the Debian guys screwed up - come download
the real one from the usual places."
Geez - just make it happen and get over it.
IceWeasel and gentoo linux (Score:1)
When Firefox ceases to be Firefox... (Score:5, Insightful)
2) a user on a Debian system not knowing this goes to Mozilla IRC with a Firefox problem (this has already happened)
3) No one can solve the Bug... only to find it is an unofficial patch made or nto made by Debian
4) User complains that Firefox sucks because its not the same across systems
5) Brand is tarnished
6) Rinse. Repeat.
If you don't want to follow the guidelines, and follow your own way of doing things... change the name, or risk damaging the whole projects reputation. If I know Firefox works a certain way, I go to a new system and something doesn't work quite right, well guess what I'm not going to be happy. It's starts with the logo... but where does it end?
Iceweasel? (Score:2, Insightful)
Establish another good common name (Score:2)
(http://blog.paulmcgarry.com/ | Last Journal: Friday July 25 2003, @12:57AM)
If the main problem with not using "Firefox" is that the new name won't be recognisable then the solution is to make the new name recogniseable.
Interestingly this could devalue the "Firefox" name more than freer licencing of the trademark. If a competing name is established and used by most distributors (and maybe packaged for Windows too) then it may be the start of the new name overtaking "Firefox" in peoples minds.
Call me slow... (Score:1)
(http://www.myspace.com/crasher35)
HAH! That's brilliant! (Score:3, Interesting)
(http://slashdot.org/ | Last Journal: Wednesday April 13 2005, @03:14AM)
Now this is one reason why I love open source software so much. They have fun with their naming. It makes using an OS so much more interesting. Much better than using those staid commercial systems. IceWeasel has to rate up there with replacing "more" with "less", or naming a vi clone as "Elvis".
Too many syllables, "IceVole" perhaps? (Score:1)
As a debian user... (Score:2)
(http://obruo.com/ | Last Journal: Wednesday November 22 2006, @06:34PM)
A revelation (Score:3, Interesting)
(http://aqpeag.blogspot.com/ | Last Journal: Saturday April 21 2007, @05:39AM)
Main Entry: contrary
Pronunciation: 'kän-"trer-E, -"tre-rE, 4 often k&n-'trer-E
Function: adjective
1 : being so different as to be at opposite extremes : OPPOSITE (come to the contrary conclusion) (went off in contrary directions); also : being opposite to or in conflict with each other (contrary viewpoints)
2 : being not in conformity with what is usual or expected (actions contrary to company policy) (contrary evidence)
3 : UNFAVORABLE -- used of wind or weather
4 : temperamentally unwilling to accept control or advice
- contrarily
- contrariness
Without simply being derogatory, I've realised that when I think of Debian, the above word is what has customarily come to mind. It's nothing I can concretely put my finger on, but I've always felt that there was an aura of perversity about the project...a sense that the Debian developers change things from the upstream norm purely because they can, and not because they've necessarily put thought into whether or not it'd actually be a good idea. Not only that, I can also remember going into the Debian IRC channel on Freenode once. It reminded me very strongly of the account of the Mad Hatter's tea party from Alice in Wonderland. They honestly came across as some of the weirdest and most unhinged individuals I've encountered. I've been using IRC for 12 years, and have known some very bizarre types online...so that is saying a lot.
I'm not claiming that that is definitely what is happening here...I don't know, and the referenced article is sufficiently vague that I feel as though I still haven't got a better idea after having read it. What I am definitely saying however is that from what I've seen, these kinds of issues coming up is entirely consistent with Debian culturally. It's also one of the reasons why I've stayed far away from the distribution; that, their degree of formality with "policy", (are they a FOSS project, or a sovereign government?!) and their degree of open sympathy with Stallman/the FSF. I think I also resent the fact that I've read about them being referred to as the only "successful" non-commercial distribution, when due in part to the reasons listed above, there are others that I feel are at least as worthy of that designation as Debian is, if not moreso. Debian might be bigger, sure...but size alone does not necessarily equal success in my own mind.
That's not to say that there haven't been good things to come from the project, at least in a secondary sense. (Knoppix and Ubuntu come to mind, which are both Debian spinoffs) The point is that it's a long way from perfect...and things like this debacle are evidence to support that assertion.
Debian didn't invent IceWeasel (Score:1)
(http://ubuntulinuxtipstricks.blogspot.com/)
simple solution! (Score:2)
there are enough dsfg-compliant alternatives (epiphany, evolution, K-whatever, etc) out there to include in the regular "main" repository.
problem solved!
assinine (Score:1)
Are they going to rename every package in the pools? Just add the bastard to non-free if you're that farking worried about it.
flippin debian, too much politics, not enough releasing.
I hope they use the standard browser (Score:1)
(Last Journal: Saturday March 03 2007, @04:33AM)
And of course security updates. It would benefit everyone if they just send patches upstream.
https://launchpad.net/distros/ubuntu/+source/fire
I hope ubuntu sticks with the vanilla browser.
Matthew Garrett on the situation (Score:2, Informative)
IceWeasel beats FireFox usage stats by end of 2007 (Score:2, Insightful)
(http://sidux.com/)
All about the Merch (Score:1)
(http://www.boreworms.com/paulh/)
They should just open the Firefox Restaurant and be done with it.
Completely Stupid (Score:1)
FINE. Ive been a debian user for many years - giving people permission to change the logo and mess with it is like changing my name on programs that I write. Leave my name on it and leave the logo ALONE.
Firefox is already opensource - what more do you want - to now change the logo?!? What the hell would be the point of that?? Demands and decisions like this are what will drive debian into the ground.
You will be wasting time and effort reworking the browser and coming up with your own.
why not spend this time trying to get the next release out sooner than worrying about logos?!?!?
Debian people: Stop being so stupid
~Daviddutch1964
In plain English... (Score:1)
Re:Fuck 'em both. (Score:1)
Re:Fuck 'em both. (Score:2)
(http://dev/null/)
Indeed, the kind of people that put out crap like "This is how brands and trademarks are being managed in the world today" and "to protect consumers and the reputation of our products".
Please, cut the crap and just ship it named iceweasel, I for one trust Debian far more when it comes to putting out rock solid software then some Mozilla(tm) Corp.