Open Source goes Commercial?

Spewey · Post by **Spewey** » February 12th, 2004, 1:25 am

*you* have officially won the *gay* award for a post which *delivers* supreme *faggotry*

johnleemk · Post by **johnleemk** » February 12th, 2004, 5:15 am

I've seen retarded comments from both sides here. I get this feeling that not too many people are understanding what's going on. Ben and Bart's posts would be a good start. Thumper is one of those against this that actually seems to have grasped it.

In short, some of your arguments turn against themselves. For example, if nobody views the About screen, what's the big deal? Why is this prohibiting builders from optimising Firefox? Are icons such an integral part of builds that your Firefox build will crash if they aren't in there? And for "us" and "them" Ben's blog provides an excellent explanation. The changes were done so that at the last minute nobody would suddenly nip in before they did and trademark Firefox, forcing them to start over. Also keep in mind they had secretly promised the Firebird database team that the name would be changed by 0.8 - I'd rather have some common sensical trustworthy devs than transparent incompetent ones.

Of course, there are excellent arguments for why this doesn't make sense and why it does. But please, if you haven't read all that Ben/other devs/the Mozilla Foundation has to say on this, don't bother posting - you aren't contributing much, if any, to the conversation(not trying to sound elitist, but it's hard to find easier words to use). Also remember that Mozilla isn't a democracy(nor a browser; the correct name is the Mozilla Suite or Seamonkey if you're into codenames), although this seems to have been taken down when the new site design went up.

hudson · Post by **hudson** » February 12th, 2004, 7:06 am

Someone please help me out here.... Just what/who is Mozilla Foundation? Who owns MF? What does MF own?

As others have intimated, in light of the changes(?) or clarifications on the trademark and artwork issues, it seems like this is the appropriate time for MF to state whether Firefox is intended to become a commercial (non-free) product (in a similar situation to Linux/Red Hat or Darwin/OS X, etc.).

iamnotniles · Post by **iamnotniles** » February 12th, 2004, 7:57 am

wget wrote:
jedbro wrote:This is getting gay.

This isn't Counter-Strike or AOL. Please stop using that word.

If he thinks it's happy that's up to him.

sasquatch annoys me much more than this, why can't he put all his little bits into one post?

Anyhow I agree with whoever said give it time. It's fair enough for "Official" builds to be able to have their own logo, if I did one and plonked a logo on it *I* wouldn't want any random person nicking it. Ben says some CVS artwork will be made, lets them get round to it.

Honestly, moan moan moan, that's all people do whenever a new release comes, it's something to replace the "when is 0.x coming out" threads.

michaell522 · Post by **michaell522** » February 12th, 2004, 8:38 am

Hymagumba wrote:Honestly, moan moan moan, that's all people do whenever a new release comes, it's something to replace the "when is 0.x coming out" threads.

Indeed. We should just skip all this stuff and get straight on with the next one.

So, when is 0.9 coming out?

Post by **alanjstr** » February 12th, 2004, 10:50 am

Ok, that's enough of that.