Lähetetty Windowsin
Sähköpostiista
Send directory-discuss mailing list submissions to
directory-discuss@gnu.org
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/directory-discuss
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
directory-discuss-request@gnu.org
You can reach the person managing the list at
directory-discuss-owner@gnu.org
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of directory-discuss digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Pale Moon (Jason Self)
2. Re: Pale Moon (Adonay Felipe Nogueira)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2022 12:36:39 -0800
From: Jason Self <j@jxself.org>
To: directory-discuss@gnu.org
Subject: Pale Moon
Message-ID: <20221129123639.0dcc91a6@valencia>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
I think Pale Moon is not a good candidate for the Directory, and this
is why. I don't intend for this to be an all-exhaustive list for all
of the concerns about the redistribution license when someone is
exercising Freedom #2; only to show that software freedom problems
exist with it.
Pale Moon has a similiar trademark problem with Firefox [0]:
> There is NO CHARGE for the download or distribution of the browser
> package.
As explained in the Free Software Definition, all four freedoms must
be available on both a commercial and non-commercial basis. This
serves to limit Freedom 2 to gratis distribution only, making the
software nonfree. The FSF has previously communicated that such a
thing in a trademark policy makes it nonfree [1]. Perhaps someone
could host a rebranded verion of Pale Moon that doesn't have this
problem, much like how GNU IceCat solves the problem for Firefox, but
Pale Moon itself seems ineligible for being in the Free Software
Directory.
In addition:
3a seems to contain restrictions on exactly how Pale Moon can be
distributed (can't be part of AppImage, flatpak, or SNAP). With free
software, people should be able to package programs for use with
any kind of package management system.
#4 on the prohibition of "download managers" might be able to be
interpreted as not allowing other package managers like APT or
RPM too since they also function as a way to download software.
Finally:
* We reserve the right to withdraw permission for the use of official
branding and/or redistribution of officially-branded binaries
either as a whole or for specific target environments at any time,
with or without stated reason.
This affects someone's ability to exercise Freedom #2 where the
ability to share sharing exact copies can be terminated at any time
and for any reason. This seems to go against this part of the Free
Software Definition that: "In order for these freedoms to be real,
they must be permanent and irrevocable as long as you do nothing
wrong; if the developer of the software has the power to revoke the
license, or retroactively add restrictions to its terms, without your
doing anything wrong to give cause, the software is not free."
If Freedom #2 can be revoked at their will the software should not be
considered free.
0: https://www.palemoon.org/redist.shtml
1:
https://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/gnu-linux-libre/2011-08/msg00014.html
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/directory-discuss/attachments/20221129/3bb367d0/attachment.sig>
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2022 07:08:27 -0300
From: Adonay Felipe Nogueira <adfeno@hyperbola.info>
To: directory-discuss@gnu.org
Subject: Re: Pale Moon
Message-ID: <CD5AFFCF-AD8F-4E08-AC6F-901278F8C847@hyperbola.info>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
If I'm not mistaken, Hyperbola has a subproject called Iceweasel UXP, which incorporates Pale Moon's UXP/XUL/XPCOM in Firefox, but removes all the problematic trademark, among other things.
Em 29 de novembro de 2022 17:36:39 BRT, Jason Self <j@jxself.org> escreveu:
>I think Pale Moon is not a good candidate for the Directory, and this
>is why. I don't intend for this to be an all-exhaustive list for all
>of the concerns about the redistribution license when someone is
>exercising Freedom #2; only to show that software freedom problems
>exist with it.
>
>Pale Moon has a similiar trademark problem with Firefox [0]:
>> There is NO CHARGE for the download or distribution of the browser
>> package.
>
>As explained in the Free Software Definition, all four freedoms must
>be available on both a commercial and non-commercial basis. This
>serves to limit Freedom 2 to gratis distribution only, making the
>software nonfree. The FSF has previously communicated that such a
>thing in a trademark policy makes it nonfree [1]. Perhaps someone
>could host a rebranded verion of Pale Moon that doesn't have this
>problem, much like how GNU IceCat solves the problem for Firefox, but
>Pale Moon itself seems ineligible for being in the Free Software
>Directory.
>
>In addition:
>
>3a seems to contain restrictions on exactly how Pale Moon can be
>distributed (can't be part of AppImage, flatpak, or SNAP). With free
>software, people should be able to package programs for use with
>any kind of package management system.
>
>#4 on the prohibition of "download managers" might be able to be
>interpreted as not allowing other package managers like APT or
>RPM too since they also function as a way to download software.
>
>Finally:
>
>* We reserve the right to withdraw permission for the use of official
> branding and/or redistribution of officially-branded binaries
> either as a whole or for specific target environments at any time,
> with or without stated reason.
>
>This affects someone's ability to exercise Freedom #2 where the
>ability to share sharing exact copies can be terminated at any time
>and for any reason. This seems to go against this part of the Free
>Software Definition that: "In order for these freedoms to be real,
>they must be permanent and irrevocable as long as you do nothing
>wrong; if the developer of the software has the power to revoke the
>license, or retroactively add restrictions to its terms, without your
>doing anything wrong to give cause, the software is not free."
>
>If Freedom #2 can be revoked at their will the software should not be
>considered free.
>
>0: https://www.palemoon.org/redist.shtml
>1:
>https://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/gnu-linux-libre/2011-08/msg00014.html
--
* https://libreplanet.org/wiki/User:Adfeno
* Ativista não advogado, nem técnico de informática
* Compre dos vendedores locais
* Use e contribua ao software livre (diferente do gratuito)
* Enviando docs.? Use OpenDocument. Outros tipos: vide endereço anterior
* Use XMPP (federado, pai do WhatsApp)
* E-mails assinados com OpenPGP (anexo "signature.asc")
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 260 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/directory-discuss/attachments/20221130/ad249a73/attachment.sig>
------------------------------
Subject: Digest Footer
_______________________________________________
directory-discuss mailing list
directory-discuss@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/directory-discuss
------------------------------
End of directory-discuss Digest, Vol 112, Issue 1
*************************************************