![]() That's fine, I respond to old links on occasion, too. Copyright is not a factor here, as the code is under the permissive Mozilla licence (which is vastly superior to the viral GPL), but the brand is required to be protected in order for the trademark owner to keep the branding. A company can selectively enforce a copyright, but they can't selectively enforce a trademark. Trademarks are required to be protected by the trademark owner, whereas copyrights are not. ![]() Debian had to change the name of it's own altered Firefox (IceWeasel) for the same reason - do you hate Mozilla for that?ĮDIT: To reiterate, I'm talking about Trademark Law. But you can't change it and still call it Pale Moon, not without official permission. Pale Moon is open and the code is free to anybody who wants to use it and call it something else. If you think that link provides a reason to avoid Pale Moon, then you're anti-opensource. If Pale Moon doesn't defend it's branding, then anyone can release any software and call it Pale Moon. But OpenBSD is actually changing the code, making the software something else, but still calling it Pale Moon as if it was official. If OpenBSD shipped with an official build of Pale Moon, there would be no issue. Because Mozilla needs to protect it's branding. IceWeasel is Firefox, literally, with the branding removed. That's why Debian ships with IceWeasel instead of Firefox. If you don't defend your branding, you lose protection for that branding. The take-down in that link is not draconian, it's required by trademark law. I don't want to use pale moon anymore after reading that.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |