next »

[inp o҉rtb]

Ubuntu 8.10 testers who upgraded their Firefox setups to version 3.0.2 have noticed a gratuitous EULA presented by the kind folks at Mozilla. This is the first time that Mozilla has asked Canonical to include such a document, a controversial action that has triggered substantial debate over at Launchpad and Ubuntu Forums.

To see this EULA, navigate to chrome://ubufox/content/mozeula.html in Firefox.

The EULA is displayed the first time one starts Firefox after installing or upgrading it. According to Mark Shuttleworth, Firefox cannot be distributed with Ubuntu with its non-free artwork and name without the document being shown this way. While agreeing to the terms appears to some individuals as a one-time deal and a minor annoyance, it does disrupt the free desktop experience. A major point raised at the forums is that free desktop users do not expect to have to agree to multiple licenses; only proprietary software such as Adobe Flash and Adobe Acrobat Reader present their own license agreements. That Firefox itself should have a separate license is quite alarming.

Numerous solutions have been suggested, but the most promising involves simply including the same software without the proprietary artwork and branding. A trip through the repositories reveals ABrowser, an unbranded version of Firefox that is Firefox for all intents and purposes. This package depends on Firefox, but applies its own artwork and calls itself “Web Browser.” ABrowser supports all Firefox add-ons, so users should find no trouble switching to it. It’s no wonder that Debian does not include Firefox by default, but instead recommends Iceweasel.

Why must Canonical include Firefox by default if ABrowser does the job? By packaging a product called “Mozilla Firefox,” Canonical is extending the popularity of Firefox; Mozilla should be bending to Canonical’s wishes, not the other way around.

Basically, ABrowser is the same as Firefox, but gets around the messy licensing issues

[Primefalcon]

Personally it doesn't worry me, but why not not Konquerer that's a good browser.

Personally I'll still use Firefox either way myself, it's a good browser

[inp o҉rtb]

Konqueror is a great browser, and I like it too, but not everyone does.

Since ABrowser is the same as Firefox, I think it would be better for ABrowser to be Ubuntu's default browser. People who prefer to use Firefox would have no reason not to accept the EULA; after all, Mozilla is entitled to their trademark claims and so on. The only reason I see people preferring Firefox over ABrowser is the different artwork and name, but many people install their own themes anyway.

While the license does not impact individual users very much, it could impede businesses and organizations from using Ubuntu, since there'd be an extra license to accept.

[antimatter15]

Brand recognition is important.

Does Ubuntu have a EULA at the install? shouldn't the EULA for firefox be there, concatenated with the rest?

[inp o҉rtb]

Ubuntu does not present an EULA at install-time or run-time. Ubuntu is a distribution of software, not a program in and of itself. What you would consider to be an "Ubuntu EULA" would be best approximated by the EULA's of all the software the user runs. Since only free software is installed by default, there is only one license to accept by default.

That said, Ubuntu is a Canonical trademark, just as Firefox is a Mozilla trademark. One can repackage and redistribute Ubuntu under a different name and it would be totally fine. One can repackage and redistribute Firefox under a different name with different artwork and it would be cool too.

What about brand name recognition? ABrowser depends on Firefox, so installing ABrowser means pulling in Firefox as a dependency. ABrowser could be set as the default browser, but people looking specifically for Firefox would have it too.

[antimatter15]

People recognize the firefox artwork (logo).

[inp o҉rtb]

When I say brand, I mean artwork and name at the same time. People who want the brand could just accept the EULA, right?

[antimatter15]

But who really cares?

[Primefalcon]

there are a lot of people who won't use proprietary anything, personally as far as I'm concerned here firefox is open source, it's free, artwork ahh they're entitled too so it doesn't worry me whatsoever

[antimatter15]

Well, if mozilla doesn't protect their trademark, it could get revoked. and they don't want that.

[manicgames]

This really dosn't affect me because I like to use Opera as Opera was built for linux at the start. Plus it actually goes fast on linux.

[Primefalcon]

Opera began in 1994 as a research project at Telenor, the largest Norwegian telecommunications company. In 1995, it branched out into a separate company named Opera Software ASA.[3] Opera was first released publicly with version 2.0 in 1996,[4] which only ran on Microsoft Windows.[5

if you want a browser designed for Linux, use Konqueror

[inp o҉rtb]

Oshiz: http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=NjcxOA

[ariarinen]

Konqueror is a great browser, and I like it too, but not everyone does.

Since ABrowser is the same as Firefox, I think it would be better for ABrowser to be Ubuntu's default browser. People who prefer to use Firefox would have no reason not to accept the EULA; after all, Mozilla is entitled to their trademark claims and so on. The only reason I see people preferring Firefox over ABrowser is the different artwork and name, but many people install their own themes anyway.

While the license does not impact individual users very much, it could impede businesses and organizations from using Ubuntu, since there'd be an extra license to accept.

Konqueror are quite good I like Webkit its fast and light, but there is many problems with Konqueror Flash tends to not work for me with it    and some features are useless and just in my way. I think its the only thing I don´t like about KDE  I think that flash works better now with it but I have not tested FF and Opera are fine 

But sure that Mozilla should be able to protect its intellectual property, if people do bad things with there clones it will hit back on Mozilla and there good will 

And Ubuntu is not Debian so why act like them  Just make there own browser 

[inp o҉rtb]

I believe that's what ABrowser is. It doesn't even have a name; it just says "Web Browser" in the title bar

I think the optimal solution would be to have a rebranded Firefox as default, and leave Firefox in the repositories for people who want it.
A recent bug report indicates that ABrowser also displays the EULA; ironic, eh?

[ariarinen]

I believe that's what ABrowser is. It doesn't even have a name; it just says "Web Browser" in the title bar

I think the optimal solution would be to have a rebranded Firefox as default, and leave Firefox in the repositories for people who want it.
A recent bug report indicates that ABrowser also displays the EULA; ironic, eh?

I think its low of Ubuntu community to rebrand Firefox just because of the wannabe EULA  and why make an other rebranded firefox aren't Iceweasel enough 

I think Enough has to be the hardest word to spell  hope that ABrowser has better spellcheck firefox did not help even do I was close to a solution "enouge" 

[inp o҉rtb]

Oh? Mozilla says the whole problem is due to the artwork and name (the brand). The logical solution would be to change the brand.

No, look... ABrowser is Firefox, so how could it have a better spell-check?

[Demonic]

I like Firefox, even if Abrowser is Firefox

[inp o҉rtb]

Even so, the argument applies to you. If you like Firefox, you could just install Firefox.

[antimatter15]

Mozilla just admitted that it's not the right thing to have a EULA, so they're looking for other ways