[Mageia-dev] Seamonkey package

[andre999]

nicolas vigier a écrit :
>
> On Thu, 10 Mar 2011, Tux99 wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> Quote: Christiaan Welvaart wrote on Thu, 10 March 2011 23:26
>> ----------------------------------------------------
>>> On Thu, 10 Mar 2011, nicolas vigier wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Thu, 10 Mar 2011, Christiaan Welvaart wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Unfortunately the seamonkey name and logos are trademarked and the
>>> license
>>>>> terms are most likely not acceptable so it seems to me we'll have
>>> to
>>>>> rename/rebrand it.
>>>>
>>>> Is it different than firefox license terms ?
>>>
>>> Same rules AFAIK, see
>>>     http://www.mozilla.org/foundation/trademarks/policy.html

Indeed, exactly the same rules.

>> I don't see why we need to change the name. The policy says:
>>
>> "If you compile Mozilla unmodified source code (including code and config
>> files in the installer) and do not charge for it, you do not need
>> additional permission from Mozilla to use the relevant Mozilla Mark(s) for
>> your compiled version."
>
> We are not using unmodified source code for firefox :
> http://svnweb.mageia.org/packages/cauldron/firefox/current/SOURCES/

Many of these entries seem to be just modified changelog entries.  (And 
of course, unmodified imports have changelog entries.)

> And it seems mandriva seamonkey package also has some patchs :
> http://svn.mandriva.com/cgi-bin/viewvc.cgi/packages/cooker/seamonkey/current/SOURCES/

These are mosty against obsolete versions of Seamonkey. (Which may 
predate the current Mozilla policy.)
Otherwise they just seem to be modified changelog entries.

Note also that if applied patches come from Mozilla, that shouldn't 
require permission.  (And Mozilla issues a lot of patches, particularly 
for security.)

As well, we don't use the logo for advertising, we are just repackaging 
the software as part of our distribution.
It might install in a somewhat different location, but that doesn't 
change the contained binaries or scripts.  Also, binaries distributed by 
Mozilla without installer (in a compressed file) can be installed 
(almost) anywhere one likes.

> Also the "do not charge for it" would make it non free (but it does not
> seem to be mentioned in the "Modifications" section, only in the
> "Unaltered Binaries" section).

Why would "do not charge for it" make it non-free ?
That doesn't seem to be a requirement of open source.  Although charging 
for it is generally permitted in unmodified open source licenses.

This addition to their policy was a reaction to commercial sites that 
were abusing open source norms, and selling modified versions of Mozilla 
products using the Mozilla reputation, logos, and trademark, to make a 
profit.  Some sites used deceptive practices to deliver only partially 
functional versions, for which they charged more to enable missing 
functions.  Which obviously didn't help Mozilla's reputation.

> So maybe we need to request permission, as explained in the
> "Modifications" section.

I don't think we need to, but we can always confirm via 
trademarks at mozilla.com

-- 
André