Since Mark is asking for input on the service, I will tell you that the first thing I do is turn off antiphishing services, along with every other thing that tends to track my surfing. I turn off Javascript and cookies too, for example, so I'm definitely not the average person in my habits. I turn stuff on as needed, clean up, and turn it off again.
So I don't think one can assume that there are no people who will find the antiphishing service objectionable. I personally would prefer that it be turned off by default and allow folks to turn it on if they want it. There seems no reason to treat people like children, needing our protection whether they want it or not. How much pain would that cause Mozilla, compared to the pain caused to those of us who really care about Main being clean? The software is modifiable, but after you say I agree, then is it? Under the same license? I was sick last week, so I haven't had a chance to seriously review the language on the services part, so this is just to make clear that while I definitely see the major issue, the EULA, resolved, I haven't said the same about the services agreement to date. My question is this, and please excuse a stupid question, but I'm not a programmer, so I don't know, and to analyze the language, I need to understand this point: is the antiphishing part strictly services, or is there not software involved too? If the latter, surely that software is not freely redistributable and modifiable, is it? If it isn't, then where are we if it is on by default? -- 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
