On Fri, Jun 06, 2014 at 02:29:50PM -0400, Stephen Gallagher wrote: > On 06/06/2014 01:26 PM, Stephen Gallagher wrote: > > On 06/06/2014 01:18 PM, Michael Catanzaro wrote: > >> On Fri, 2014-06-06 at 12:33 -0400, Josh Boyer wrote: > >>> It might run afoul of the Firefox trademark thing. A rebranded > >>> "IceWeasle GNOME" loses all the brand recognition. > > > >> I know we are not allowed to apply unauthorized patches. I didn't > >> realize extensions might also be impermissible. If so, that > >> would be a strong argument against Firefox. > > > > We should invoke the lawyers here, but I doubt that this would be > > impermissible. I suspect that Firefox implicitly allows this simply > > by offering a public extension interface and a freely-available > > mechanism to apply them. > > It was pointed out to me off-list that Mozilla does in fact have > trademark restrictions on shipping plugins, extensions and themes by > default: > > http://www.mozilla.org/en-US/foundation/trademarks/policy/ contains > the following phrasing: > > "If you want to ship extensions, themes or plug-ins installed by > default or as part of the same installation process as the Mozilla > products (as opposed to, say, linked as XPIs from the default start > page), and you plan on distributing them under any Mozilla Marks, you > must first seek approval from us. What we find acceptable will depend > on the effect of the extensions, themes and plug-ins on the Mozilla > product. To give examples, changing the theme of one product to > another, equally high-quality and aesthetically pleasing theme would > be considered. A combination of ten different extensions with three > toolbars and seven context menu items probably wouldn't be." > > > So we might be able to ship with these extensions, but we would need > Mozilla's approval first. > > Seriously, it's like they're going out of their way to discourage us > from using their product. I wouldn't say that. It's relatively simple for themes and extensions to render the final result ugly or unusable in a way that reflects poorly on Mozilla/Firefox. We require people who recombine Fedora with other software not to use our trademarks to refer to their resulting effort. No difference here IMHO other than Mozilla trying to acknowledge that some distributions might want to do exactly what we're talking about, and they want to leave the door open. -- Paul W. Frields http://paul.frields.org/ gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717 http://redhat.com/ - - - - http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/ The open source story continues to grow: http://opensource.com -- desktop mailing list desktop@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop
