This does indeed add an entirely different level of legal due diligence which must be done before use can be verified by legal.
The clauses are further restrictions on the GPL (problematic for derivatives), and I think at the very least it should have an explanation stating that the EULA has been added by Mozilla and does not apply to any other program. I'd have the dialogue box offer to install abrowser if the EULA is declined. Option boxes would be something like (and I'm a law student, not a HCI guy so I'm aware wording could be better). 'Agree and start firefox' 'Disagree and quit' 'Use abrowser (Ubuntu's unbranded firefox)' IMO applying EULAs to things in main is an *extremely* bad idea as it makes the freedoms that main claims to represent invalid. Surely firefox should now live in restricted. -- AN IRRELEVANT LICENSE IS PRESENTED TO YOU FREE-OF-CHARGE ON STARTUP https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/269656 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
