| 当大部分人提到Mozilla Firefox浏览器的时候，大家都会把它和开源、免费等字眼联系在一起。但是事实是：Mozilla是开源免费的，但并不是完全自由的，甚至很大程度上和Debian GNU/Linux存在冲突，在对软件的理念上的。 尽管Debian及其衍生Linux发行版，比如Ubuntu，都在发行版中包含了Mozilla Firefox软件，但是并没有显示Firefox的logo，就是那个小狐狸的标志。 Debian一直都坚持它的 发行版的理念，追随GNU的自由软件的理念。Firefox的logo是商标，所以Debian认为它并不是自由的，所有在它的发行版中不包含Firefox的商标，而且Mozilla基金会也认为，如果没有得到官方的许可，使用Firefox的商标也是非法的。 更夸张的是，Mozilla基金会认为，如果Debian在它的发行版为Firefox制作漏洞补丁也要得到Mozilla基金会的许可。这很有可能导致开源社区和自由软件社区的矛盾加深，直接的后果是Firefox将不会出现在Debian的软件名录里。 Debian的开放人员Eric Dorland承认，他们将从源码编译Firefox，并且给它重新起个名字，这个过程最快在下周就可能会有结果。 When most people think about the Mozilla Firefox browser, they think of it as being open source and free. The truth is, while Mozilla Firefox is open source, it is not entirely free, and it may not even be legally compatible with Debian GNU/Linux, one of the most popular community Linux distribution bases. Though Debian and Debian-derived distributions such as the popular Ubuntu Linux currently include Mozilla Firefox, they do not typically include the actual Mozilla Firefox logo (the stylized fox on the globe). And therein lies the rub. The issue at hand is whether Debian can use the Firefox name for the Mozilla Firefox packages it includes in its GNU/Linux distribution. Debian adheres to a strict interpretation of what is Free Software and what isn't, as outlined in the Debian Free Software Guidelines. The Firefox logo is trademarked, so Debian doesn't consider it to be Free and will not include it as part of its distribution. Mozilla claims that using the Firefox name without the official branding is a trademark violation. Furthermore, Mozilla claims that if Debian runs any patches to the version of Firefox included with Debian distros, it has to run them by Mozilla first for approval. What all this ultimately could mean is that the Firefox name is wiped from the face of Debian and its offshoots. Debian developer Eric Dorland confirmed to internetnews.com that Debian will re-name Firefox and that the re-naming process could be completed as soon as next week. The whole dispute stems from the Mozilla Corporation's new-found determination to enforce trademarks. In an e-mail sent to Debian developers, Mozilla staffer Mike Connor explained that the Mozilla Corporation has been handling patch approvals from distributions since the corporation's inception in September of 2005. "The way this works (and the way Red Hat and Novell have already gone through the process for 1.0 and 1.5) is that you have to submit patches that deviate from the source tarballs in order to continue to use the trademark," Connor wrote. "This is us attempting to tell you that what you are doing is not correct and needs to change. "If you are going to use the Firefox name, you must also use the rest of the branding," Connor continued. "This is not something where you are free to pick what parts you want to use. Either use the trademarked logos and name together or don't." The timing of Mozilla's trademark enforcement lust couldn't have come at a worse time for Debian. A new Debian distro release, code-named "Etch," is due out by the end of the year, the first major release since Sarge in June 2005. Dorland actually asked Connor at one point in their e-mail discussion for a ,"stay of execution" until after Etch is released. Mozilla's Connor had no sympathy for Dorland or Debian Etch and argued that the issue needs to be resolved before the release. "I would think it makes much more sense to resolve this before you put another long-lived release into the wild, unless your aim is to delay compliance," Connor wrote to Dorland. Debian's Dorland is standing his ground and will comply with Mozilla's heavy handedness by re-naming the Mozilla Firefox packages so that Debian will no longer be considered to be infringing on Mozilla's trademarks. While using the Firefox name without the Firefox logo is not permissible, changing the name and calling Firefox something else is permissible. It is unknown at this point what the new name for Debian's Firefox package will be called. "There are a few names floating around that I'll probably choose from," Dorland told internetnews.com. "I'm afraid some of them might be too close to 'Firefox' to be comfortable if, for some reason, the Mozilla Corp. wished to come down even harder. "I'll pretty much have to pick something and start the renaming by next week if I've any hope to get things ready for Etch." In Dorland's view, the logo and the Mozilla approvals for Debian's Firefox patches are fundamentally the same issue. "They really both stem from the same issue, that they're taking a very hard-line approach with their trademarks," Dorland said. "Now their lawyers may feel this is necessary -- and legally it may actually be the 'correct' thing to do -- but it really seems to run counter to community expectations. "But I suppose on a day-to-day basis having to seek approval for patches would make working on the package a lot less fun." |
