Someone posted a link in the irc that in the next release of Ubuntu, Intrepid Ibex, a user has to accept Firefox EULA (End User Licence Agreement) upon the first run.
A SOURCE CODE VERSION OF CERTAIN FIREFOX BROWSER FUNCTIONALITY THAT YOU MAY USE, MODIFY AND DISTRIBUTE IS AVAILABLE TO YOU FREE-OF-CHARGE FROM WWW.MOZILLA.ORG UNDER THE MOZILLA PUBLIC LICENSE and other open source software licenses. [full text]
To me it sounded first as a weird thing but reading the Launchpad bug report about it it started to make some sense. But it’s an annoyance anyway.
- Not approving doesn’t stop you from using the browser
- Someone pointed out that these digital EULA acceptances are not valid in certain countries like Finland, for example (Can someone confirm?)
- There will possibly be a browser called ‘abrowser’ that’s the same browser but without Firefox branding, wrote Mark Shuttleworth
- Some window explaining the idea behind the EULA as well as mentioning the alternative(s) like abrowser will possibly be shown before showing the actual EULA.
So it’s all about Mozilla believing this is what needs to be done to protect their trademark. It’s open source, right so you can do pretty much anything you want with it. But it’s the trademark. Would Iceweasel be a solution? Some say that for some reason it’s more unstable than Firefox. I do agree that as a brand Firefox is good to keep visible in Ubuntu – that’s the piece of software many people know from the Windows world but.. still.. Well right, they’re also used to click click click the EULA’s of Windows programs so it might not be that big thing for new users but long time Linux users might not like it.
I myself am looking forward to run QT version of Firefox (QT means it’s designed for KDE, not Gnome as the default Firefox is) and have already tried it. Though I’d also like too Konqueror actually conquer as a web browser.. It just doesn’t know how to render stuff, for example the latest gmail fails..
What would you click? What if some other open source programs would start requiring user accepting an EULA as well. GIMP, Gnome, Konqueror, KDE, F-spot, … Bad idea, I think.
Related posts:
- N900 & HupNet & OpenVPN I was told 2G+WLAN would use less power than 3G...
To be fair to konqueror it is able to render GMail, you just have to change your browser identification, Mozilla Version 1.7.3. I don’t think chat works but everything else seems fine.
Switch to icecat/iceweasel, or continue ignoring the problem. Ubuntu hasn’t the same standards as Debian so ignoring it should be fine.
I am a kubuntu/kde4 user.
I think google’s browser Chrome would have an EULA as well, so it would not be a solution; i consider it very user friendly, but as it is, doesn’t fit very very with the rest of the applications since it doesn’t respect the HIG by not having a menu bar (i find menu bars very 60′s anyway).
Konqueror, although it has a lot of features, shouldn’t even be installed by default since it’s not really worthy as a browser; khtml is rather defunct and i’m really looking forward to (k)Webkit implementation. I use most of the google services, especially gmail and i find the chat a must have feature, can’t just forget about it for the sake of using Konqueror. My main usage for this browser is as a FTP client.
Arora is a very neat qt-browser.
I’ve used IceWeasel for quite some time, i kinda like it.
Firefox -QT i think it won’t really be maintained by Mozilla Foundation and imho it should get it’s own name (and get active maintainers of course). Consider this as branch of Firefox; could be used on both Gnome and KDE with proper integration (plugins anyone?).
Also qt 4.5 as i understand is able to get native GTK+ look as well, so i wonder if it can use the GTK+ file menu, like when you are browsing your computer when to save a file or selecting one.
I wouldn’t have a problem explicitly (instead of implicitly) agreeing to the MPL. It’s still an open source license. If a default app required agreeing to a non-open-source license, *then* I’d have a problem.
I think in Germany the EULA would not be valid as well. At least for software you buy it is not valid as you have to agree to a licence before you buy the software. The licence is part of the treaty.
I don’t know how this affects free software as Ubuntu. I would think that the EULA is not valid, if it is presented after the installation. E.g. if you install the Sun Java package you are asked before you install the package if you accept the licence. That seems ok to me. But the way descriped in the bug report, seems not to be valid to me.
Well no FF for me in Intrepid. I won’t accept an EULA.
This is not MPL, this is EULA, which includes:
2. TERMINATION. If you breach this Agreement your right to use the Product will terminate immediately and without notice, but all provisions of this Agreement except the License Grant (Paragraph 1) will survive termination and continue in effect. Upon termination, you must destroy all copies of the Product.
Check it out at:
http://www.mozilla.com/en-US/legal/eula/firefox-en.html
@Conor: I’ve tried it with no much success, have to see if something has changed since the last time..
@Dread Knight: yes, as a web browser in the current state I wouldn’t either install Konqueror by default.. We’ll see what cool things webkit integration will bring us.. But I too like to use Konqueror for sftp and stuff (though have had some problems there and have filezilla as backup..). And what I mostly don’t like in Firefox is the Gtk open/save menu.. QT just works better..
“I myself am looking forward to run QT version of Firefox (QT means it’s designed for KDE, not Gnome as the default Firefox is) ”
I wasn’t aware of any special KDE integration in the firefox Qt build.
KDE uses Qt libs, so does the Firefox port (obviously), but that doesn’t mean one is designed for the other.
@Michael Yep, you’re right, I was a bit unclear there..
EULAs are legalese. People see EULAs and they cringe. They look foreign, they are scary, and they always feel hostile.
Whatever the contents, this is severely damaging to the user experience for Ubuntu. It is not appropriate that the default web browser demands an EULA after installing the operating system.
I am really, really REALLY looking forward to epiphany-webkit.
Digg it:
http://digg.com/linux_unix/Mozilla_wants_Linux_users_to_accept_EULA_at_Firefox_startup
iceweasel is not less stable than Firefoz. I use both daily, and have done for a long time.
With iceweasel, it’s a good idea to change the useragent string to Firefox via about: and then searching for useragent. There are a few sites (eg wsj.com) that don’t recognise Iceweasel as Firefox unless you do this.
I wonder why Ubuntu can’t use iceweasel?
The source code is released under MPL, but ubuntu is shipping the binaries on the default install.
The binaries are not opensource, they are given under previsions of the EULA.
I’m not sure what Mozilla is thinking. All i can think is: fire that new CEO. Fire him now, or FORK.. . FORK
And i’m not even touching the legal issues here. It’s not corporate deployable anymore. Not until I run this EULA by the lawyers. And the next EULA and the next… (because there will be more, once we accept this piece of SHIT)
So, no .. impossible, impractical.
Lets rename it to MozillaDidntAllowUsToCallItFirefoxButItIS
Which is a new name.. yet, makes the point clear and throw the correct amount of mud.
Erh…
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=443918
What about it ?
If you can’t stand this firefox eula, just build it, don’t spit on Mozilla coders.
Pingback: Does Mozilla hate Ubuntu users? « I’m Just an Avatar
Solved:
http://www.linuxhaxor.net/2008/10/25/firefox-removes-its-license-agreement-from-ubuntu/