Just to throw in my metaphorical towel. Chip Bennet, who I have found myself agreeing with from the beginning and who has a much better way with words than me, has apparently actually gone and read the agreement that is the final piece of this puzzle.
In comment 508: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/firefox-3.0/+bug/269656/comments/508 he basically concludes that the new wording of the terms do not appear to require any concrete action; in fact the action is now non- compulsory: "... I see no reason for the services not to be enabled by default - with respect to matters of software freedom. (I still contend that the matter of the *usefulness* of those services is not germane to the issues at hand and under discussion in this bug report.)" Having just read the terms myself here (http://launchpadlibrarian.net/17836931/about_rights_expanded.png), I concur with Chip completely. The language is plain (even I can understand it) and does not appear to impose any restrictions on my usage. In reality, it simply explains to me that the service might not be 100% effective. I'd love to see PJ's analysis but it looks fine by me. +1 to continue including Firefox in main. This has been a very exhilarating experience. A large cohort of community members have been able to have their say and it would seem that the majority have been very clearly heard. A most excellent outcome seems imminent for all involved. PS - The image of the "terms" has a major typo however: *Items 4 and 5 are the same*. Please can we see the "official" terms - if they are done yet - before closing this? -- 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
