| |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
where does it says that?where does it says that?Posted Aug 13, 2009 18:20 UTC (Thu) by coriordan (guest, #7544)In reply to: where does it says that? by rqosa Parent article: Ubuntu removes "multisearch"
The technical steps are indeed trivial, but the user confusion cost is high.
When using the trademark, you can't make changes without Mozilla's permission - i.e. you can't apply security patches. Despite this, distros such as Ubuntu have accepted the trademark restrictions, so they've obviously estimated very highly the user overall cost of removing the trademark.
I don't know the whole Debian story but I think it's that they switched to their branding before the "unbrand" feature was added to the Firefox compile process. You might find the answer on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mozilla_Corporation_software...
(Log in to post comments)
where does it says that? Posted Aug 13, 2009 23:40 UTC (Thu) by rqosa (guest, #24136) [Link] > the user confusion cost is highI don't agree with that. It's obvious that a rebranded Firefox is really Firefox. > When using the trademark, you can't make changes without Mozilla's permission - i.e. you can't apply security patches. Which is yet another reason why distributors should not use the official branding.
where does it says that? Posted Aug 14, 2009 20:56 UTC (Fri) by coriordan (guest, #7544) [Link] I wish you were right about changing the name not being a big deal, but if you were right, why did Ubuntu agree to those extremely restrictive terms?
|
|
||||||||||||