Re: [arch-general] Can we use the "Firefox" name?
On Wed, 2008-06-11 at 08:12 +0200, Jan de Groot wrote: > On Wed, 2008-06-11 at 01:57 -0400, Yonathan Dossow wrote: > > IMHO, to avoid trademark violations we should use IceWeasel. > > Would it make sense to distribute an iceweasel package with a binary > inside it called "firefox"? i'm not sure(i dont use debian) but i think that the debian's iceweasel package contains a binary called iceweasel. -- Yonathan H. Dossow Acun~a http://kronin.bla.cl Estudiante Ingenieria Civil Informatica Unidad de Servicios de Computacion e Internet Fono: +56 32 2654367 Universidad Tecnica Federico Santa Maria Valparaiso, Chile
Re: [arch-general] Can we use the "Firefox" name?
On Wed, 2008-06-11 at 01:57 -0400, Yonathan Dossow wrote: > IMHO, to avoid trademark violations we should use IceWeasel. Would it make sense to distribute an iceweasel package with a binary inside it called "firefox"? Mozilla Corporation should fix their binary names, installation prefix, etc to get us to drop the firefox package name.
Re: [arch-general] Can we use the "Firefox" name?
On Tue, 2008-06-10 at 22:52 -0500, Dan McGee wrote: > On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 10:46 PM, Alessio Bolognino > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > There is a thing that I have never understood: we ship the Firefox > > package not branded, for the well known issues with the licensing of the > > artwork, and that's fine; but are we sure we can name that package > > "firefox" ? If you ask it to me, I think we can not: > > > > Mike Connor (a Mozilla guy :) said here [1]: > > "Firefox (the name) is equally protected and controlled by the same > > trademark policy and legal requirements as the Firefox logo. You're > > free to use any other name for the browser bits, but calling the browser > > Firefox requires the same approvals as are required for using the logo > > and other artwork. > > [...] > > If you are going to use the Firefox name, you must also use the rest of the > > branding." > > > > Mozilla may say that we are "lying" to users, because the name is named > > firefox, but it doesn't contain Firefox. > > Sure we name our package firefox- after the binary named firefox > contained within. When they fix their build process to name the > unbranded binary differently, perhaps we can adjust our package name > accordingly. IMHO, to avoid trademark violations we should use IceWeasel. -- Yonathan H. Dossow Acun~a http://kronin.bla.cl Estudiante Ingenieria Civil Informatica Unidad de Servicios de Computacion e Internet Fono: +56 32 2654367 Universidad Tecnica Federico Santa Maria Valparaiso, Chile
Re: [arch-general] Can we use the "Firefox" name?
On Tue 2008-06-10 22:52, Dan McGee wrote: > On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 10:46 PM, Alessio Bolognino > > [...] > > Sure we name our package firefox- after the binary named firefox > contained within. When they fix their build process to name the > unbranded binary differently, perhaps we can adjust our package name > accordingly. OK, it sounds reasonable for me :) -- Alessio (molok) Bolognino Please send personal email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Public Key http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0xFE0270FB GPG Key ID = 1024D / FE0270FB 2007-04-11 Key Fingerprint = 9AF8 9011 F271 450D 59CF 2D7D 96C9 8F2A FE02 70FB pgpzdqYxtFukc.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [arch-general] Can we use the "Firefox" name?
On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 10:46 PM, Alessio Bolognino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > There is a thing that I have never understood: we ship the Firefox > package not branded, for the well known issues with the licensing of the > artwork, and that's fine; but are we sure we can name that package > "firefox" ? If you ask it to me, I think we can not: > > Mike Connor (a Mozilla guy :) said here [1]: > "Firefox (the name) is equally protected and controlled by the same > trademark policy and legal requirements as the Firefox logo. You're > free to use any other name for the browser bits, but calling the browser > Firefox requires the same approvals as are required for using the logo > and other artwork. > [...] > If you are going to use the Firefox name, you must also use the rest of the > branding." > > Mozilla may say that we are "lying" to users, because the name is named > firefox, but it doesn't contain Firefox. Sure we name our package firefox- after the binary named firefox contained within. When they fix their build process to name the unbranded binary differently, perhaps we can adjust our package name accordingly. -Dan
Re: [arch-general] Can we use the "Firefox" name?
On Wed 2008-06-11 05:46, Alessio 'mOLOk' Bolognino wrote: > There is a thing that I have never understood: we ship the Firefox > package not branded, for the well known issues with the licensing of the > artwork, and that's fine; but are we sure we can name that package > "firefox" ? If you ask it to me, I think we can not: > > Mike Connor (a Mozilla guy :) said here [1]: > "Firefox (the name) is equally protected and controlled by the same > trademark policy and legal requirements as the Firefox logo. You're > free to use any other name for the browser bits, but calling the browser > Firefox requires the same approvals as are required for using the logo > and other artwork. > [...] > If you are going to use the Firefox name, you must also use the rest of the > branding." > > Mozilla may say that we are "lying" to users, because the name is named > firefox, but it doesn't contain Firefox. > > Discuss! And I just found this old bug report: http://bugs.archlinux.org/task/5795 I don't know why I missed it the first time I searched for it. -- Alessio (molok) Bolognino Please send personal email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Public Key http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0xFE0270FB GPG Key ID = 1024D / FE0270FB 2007-04-11 Key Fingerprint = 9AF8 9011 F271 450D 59CF 2D7D 96C9 8F2A FE02 70FB pgpQORYiHOmp7.pgp Description: PGP signature
[arch-general] Can we use the "Firefox" name?
There is a thing that I have never understood: we ship the Firefox package not branded, for the well known issues with the licensing of the artwork, and that's fine; but are we sure we can name that package "firefox" ? If you ask it to me, I think we can not: Mike Connor (a Mozilla guy :) said here [1]: "Firefox (the name) is equally protected and controlled by the same trademark policy and legal requirements as the Firefox logo. You're free to use any other name for the browser bits, but calling the browser Firefox requires the same approvals as are required for using the logo and other artwork. [...] If you are going to use the Firefox name, you must also use the rest of the branding." Mozilla may say that we are "lying" to users, because the name is named firefox, but it doesn't contain Firefox. Discuss! P.S. I didn't filed a bug report yet because I want to discuss this here. P.P.S Please don't hate me. References: [1] http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=354622 -- Alessio (molok) Bolognino Please send personal email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Public Key http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0xFE0270FB GPG Key ID = 1024D / FE0270FB 2007-04-11 Key Fingerprint = 9AF8 9011 F271 450D 59CF 2D7D 96C9 8F2A FE02 70FB pgpyMmpGC07ue.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [arch-general] GTK applications can not remember their last position
that pkgbuild worked great for me. Thanks!
Re: [arch-general] GTK applications can not remember their last position
On Tue, June 10, 2008 10:32, Chris Bolton wrote: > if you go to that bug page, and follow the link to the upstream bug > report, apparently there's a patch that fixed. Unfortunately, I have no > idea how to apply that patch. can someone provide instructions? thanks. I uploaded a PKGBUILD integrating the patch to Flyspray[1]. Download, extract, run 'makepkg -cf' from within the extracted directory to build the package and install the package explicitly through running 'pacman -Up '. The package fixes the bug for me on my x64-machine, but is otherwise completely untested! HTH, Dennis [1] - http://bugs.archlinux.org/task/10613
Re: [arch-general] GTK applications can not remember their last position
if you go to that bug page, and follow the link to the upstream bug report, apparently there's a patch that fixed. Unfortunately, I have no idea how to apply that patch. can someone provide instructions? thanks.
Re: [arch-general] GTK applications can not remember their last position
http://bugs.archlinux.org/task/10613 Lyman wrote: Hi, all It is a little weird that all my GTK applications (eg, pidgin && pcmanx) can not remember their last position today. Instead, they all appear at top-left corner. I've no idea what could be wrong. Any ideas? lyman
[arch-general] GTK applications can not remember their last position
Hi, all It is a little weird that all my GTK applications (eg, pidgin && pcmanx) can not remember their last position today. Instead, they all appear at top-left corner. I've no idea what could be wrong. Any ideas? lyman
