Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2018 03:09:20 +0000 From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: gecko@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 234020] www/firefox: Do we have prior written permission to patch and use official branding? Message-ID: <bug-234020-21738-E4LmTUAfCF@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/> In-Reply-To: <bug-234020-21738@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/> References: <bug-234020-21738@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=234020 Conrad Meyer <cem@freebsd.org> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|New |Closed Resolution|--- |Works As Intended --- Comment #2 from Conrad Meyer <cem@freebsd.org> --- (In reply to Jan Beich from comment #1) > Probably[1] The first document looks promising, but it's unclear what the context was ("your builds are configured so closely to ours") at the time (and it's unclear what the time was). (The file has a 2004 timestamp on it, which seems improbable — that was shortly after the name changed from Firebird.) I guess the written permission in that document is pretty broad, so maybe we're still fine. I guess I would feel more comfortable if I knew how our patchset today compares with the one from whenever the permission was granted, but, what the hell. It answers my question/concern. > Mozilla themselves don't provide FreeBSD binaries. Many port patches are > due to lack of manpower to clean up the cruft and upstream the rest. None of this is relevant to Mozilla's exercise of their trademark rights. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?bug-234020-21738-E4LmTUAfCF>