Mozilla EULA

This is a discussion on Mozilla EULA within the A Brief History of Cprogramming.com forums, part of the Community Boards category; As you probably know the new Mozilla EULA is causing quiet a ruckus in the Ubuntu community. At least from ...

  1. #1
    (?<!re)tired Mario F.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Portugal
    Posts
    7,383

    Mozilla EULA

    As you probably know the new Mozilla EULA is causing quiet a ruckus in the Ubuntu community. At least from what I know so far.




    I'm currently on a ad hoc debate about this issue but I would ike to understand more of what the problem is all about. Honestly I cannot understand why the criticism.

    One one hand, Ubuntu doesn't provide a "Social Contract" in any terms similar to Debian's, for which I don't see the problem of the EULA's being displayed on FF first use under Ubuntu. On the other hand, I can see this EULA making it difficult to justify FF presence in the Ubuntu's Main repository and having eventually to move it to Restricted. But there is nothing stopping Ubuntu from using software from this repository as default software.

    I'm also a little confused as to why so many feel this issue had to be openly debated? For one I cannot see how a conclusion would ever be reached and Ubuntu culdn't just wait for said decision on behalf of the commmunity, neither could it just wipe out FF and replace it with something else while de debate went along, without this affecting the product.

    Finally... given the Mozilla EULA classifying the product as a commercial product, doesn't this in fact force Mozilla to adopt the EULA under USA laws? I'm asking this last one because there's some debate whether Mozilla needed in fact an EULA and this is all just Mozilla nitpicking...
    The programmer’s wife tells him: “Run to the store and pick up a loaf of bread. If they have eggs, get a dozen.”
    The programmer comes home with 12 loaves of bread.


    Originally Posted by brewbuck:
    Reimplementing a large system in another language to get a 25% performance boost is nonsense. It would be cheaper to just get a computer which is 25% faster.

  2. #2
    Banned master5001's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Location
    Visalia, CA, USA
    Posts
    3,685
    This is an issue that is more or less a change in the dynamics of how this particular open source program conducts its business. However, as you mentioned, the EULA is kind of a legal matter in some countries (like this one, for example).

    I think the end net result will just be programs with names like UbunFox or FireUbuntox or some other rediculous derivative of the Firefox name being adapted to the host OS. WinFox... FireFOpenSuse (heh... Ok I admit I am just being an ass at this point).

  3. #3
    Cat without Hat CornedBee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    8,892
    They'll probably just reuse Debian's IceWeasel.

    Anyway ...
    http://lockshot.wordpress.com/
    All the buzzt!
    CornedBee

    "There is not now, nor has there ever been, nor will there ever be, any programming language in which it is the least bit difficult to write bad code."
    - Flon's Law

  4. #4
    & the hat of GPL slaying Thantos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Posts
    5,681
    Death to firefox!

  5. #5
    (?<!re)tired Mario F.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Portugal
    Posts
    7,383
    Yes, and death to any Open Source fascists.

    The drop the EULA in favor of a License Agreement. Fine, but what does that change? The users are still obliged to agree to the license, even if not explicitly on a click-through operation. I don't think the Open Source fascists in Ubuntu were concerned with just that.

    This is an issue that is more or less a change in the dynamics of how this particular open source program conducts its business.
    I'm guessing just that too. The issue of branding becoming a concern among Open Source projects which become popular and have the potential to provide an inflow of investment from external sources or to simply make money... I just don't think Canonical is particularly worried with Mozilla branding. Its users however seem to have adopted a radical approach to Open Source... confusing it with Free Software.

    I think the end net result will just be programs with names like UbunFox or FireUbuntox or some other rediculous derivative
    Which is exactly what we didn't need. A bunch of forks, some (like with Debian) ridiculing the very same product they are built from.

    EDIT: With friends like these, who needs enemies?
    Last edited by Mario F.; 09-16-2008 at 04:59 PM.
    The programmer’s wife tells him: “Run to the store and pick up a loaf of bread. If they have eggs, get a dozen.”
    The programmer comes home with 12 loaves of bread.


    Originally Posted by brewbuck:
    Reimplementing a large system in another language to get a 25% performance boost is nonsense. It would be cheaper to just get a computer which is 25% faster.

  6. #6
    Cat without Hat CornedBee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    8,892
    The drop the EULA in favor of a License Agreement.
    Huh? A EULA ("End-User License Agreement") is a license agreement. They're not dropping, they're rewording the license.

    The users are still obliged to agree to the license, even if not explicitly on a click-through operation.
    True, but then, you're also required to agree to the GPL if you use free software. GTK+ on Windows, for example, requires you to explicitly agree to the LGPL when you install it. GIMP requires you to agree to the GPL.
    It's just that on Linux, agreement to the GPL and LGPL is assumed, because it's, well, Linux.
    All the buzzt!
    CornedBee

    "There is not now, nor has there ever been, nor will there ever be, any programming language in which it is the least bit difficult to write bad code."
    - Flon's Law

  7. #7
    (?<!re)tired Mario F.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Portugal
    Posts
    7,383
    I noticed that they changed the wording from End-User License Agreement to License Agreement. The first is the latter. But the latter isn't just the first.

    To clarify, what I mean is that the same restrictions are still there and I think that's what they were complaining most about. If it has restrictions to use, it shouldn't be a default installation on Ubuntu, according to their stance.
    Last edited by Mario F.; 09-17-2008 at 06:23 AM.
    The programmer’s wife tells him: “Run to the store and pick up a loaf of bread. If they have eggs, get a dozen.”
    The programmer comes home with 12 loaves of bread.


    Originally Posted by brewbuck:
    Reimplementing a large system in another language to get a 25% performance boost is nonsense. It would be cheaper to just get a computer which is 25% faster.

  8. #8
    Banned master5001's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Location
    Visalia, CA, USA
    Posts
    3,685
    The conditions of the EULA do not stipulate anything that fundamentally changes the way the user can use the software. I think this is equivilent to posting a sign in your front yard that says "No Solicators" as opposed to just telling sales people who enter your property to leave. Explicit versus implicit. Nothing more.

Popular pages Recent additions subscribe to a feed

Similar Threads

  1. Exploit for non-IE browsers (and why mozilla is better than opera)
    By major_small in forum A Brief History of Cprogramming.com
    Replies: 27
    Last Post: 02-13-2005, 12:13 AM
  2. I love Mozilla
    By Davros in forum A Brief History of Cprogramming.com
    Replies: 27
    Last Post: 05-25-2004, 07:11 AM
  3. Mozilla
    By KneeGrow in forum A Brief History of Cprogramming.com
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 05-14-2004, 05:55 PM
  4. Mozilla vs Opera::which to choose?
    By Waldo2k2 in forum A Brief History of Cprogramming.com
    Replies: 32
    Last Post: 04-06-2003, 12:03 PM
  5. Mozilla - C - and perl
    By pmacne in forum C++ Programming
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 02-15-2003, 10:10 AM

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21