On Sat, Dec 13, 2008 at 10:32:32AM -0500, simo wrote: > On Sat, 2008-12-13 at 08:38 +0000, Noah Slater wrote: > > On Sat, Dec 13, 2008 at 12:39:55AM +0000, Rui Miguel Silva Seabra wrote: > > > Yes, you can modify the artwork. > > > > No, you cannot modify the artwork and redistribute. > > This is plainly false, as long as you don't use the trademarks you can.
False. You cannot modify the Firefox logo. > > > What does that have to do with: > > > 1. running the program for any purpose > > > 2. being able to study and modify it > > > 3. being able to distribute copies > > > 4. being able to distribute modified copies? > > > > You can't distribute modified copies. > > False, all you need is to remove the trademarks, might not be fun, but > it doesn't stop you to change the functionality of the program in a ny > way you want. False. You cannot modify the Firefox logo. > > > All of those are allowed, so it is Free Software. > > > > Wrong. Why is Firefox not in Debian main? Because it is non-free. > > Debian has its own concept of Free or non-Free, they are free to have their > own, but it is not universally accepted so please avoid judging free or > non-free out of the scope of the Debian project with their metric and sell > that as the Revealed Truth. You're implying that your definition is more true. > > > You just can't *call* it Firefox, but being able to call the program > > > whatever > > > you want is not one of the software freedoms. > > > > You have misunderstood the issue at hand. > > That's just your opinion, not all people agree with the Debian view, nor > on Firefox, nor on the GFDL to name a few. No, I am stating a fact. The original message had misunderstood that you cannot modify the Firefox logo. > Now consider that you cannot change any Free Software program name into > Coca-Cola and redistribute it. Does it mean they are all non-Free because > there is at least one modification you can't make ? Of course not. The ImageMagick cannot be modified, thus is non-free. Same thing. > Or would you consider the Firefox code free if they distributed their source > code normally under the name Foobar, and then used the Firefox brand only for > their binary distribution ? Would it make any difference ? If so what would > that be? And if not why not ? Firefox is the name of the software when branded as Firefox. When branded as Firefox, with the logo and the name, the software is non-free. -- Noah Slater, http://tumbolia.org/nslater _______________________________________________ Discussion mailing list Discussion@fsfeurope.org https://mail.fsfeurope.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion
