Hi, Steve: On Wednesday 11 November 2009 08:17:50 Steve Langasek wrote: > On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 07:37:56AM +0100, Christian Perrier wrote: > > IMHO, with not very convincing arguments. And no sign of answer about > > the real potential problem: would that be another trademark issue. > > > > Whatever solution is taken in the other branches of this thread where > > possible UA strings are discussed, I think we should at some point > > check with Mozilla Corporation about their stance: would they consider > > it to be a trademark violation if we mention "Firefox" in some way in > > the UA string of Iceweasel?
Trade Mark protection as usual. It is not about naming the cursed word; it's the way you mention it. > I strongly disagree that we should do this, because it's *not* a trademark > violation, so any opinion they might hold to the contrary is not relevant. Of course you are not talking with your attorney hat here. Just take it a bit out of context (as a lawyer would probably do): Attorney: What's a User Agent String? Expert: Well, it's the way the browser identifies itself against the server. A.: So, can I say it's like me asking you "Who are you" and you answering me "I'm Mr. Smith?" or "what's that? is this a Pepsi or what is it?" E.: Well... I'd say that... A.: Just answer yes or not! E.: Hummm... Err... Well, yes. A.: So then, Iceweasel is claiming to be "Firefox" against the server which asks it? E.: Yes. A.: It is not answering "I'm *like* Firefox" or "My codebase is based on that from Firefox" but "I'm Firefox"? E.: Yes. A.: No more questions. Forget it's only machine to machine chatting and think for a second the user-agent string were on a newspaper. I think it's clear that "Firefox 3.5" would be an obvious copyright infringement while "Based on Firefox 3.5" would be perfectly safe. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
