[Wolves] firefox non-free?

[sparkes]

On Wed, 2004-03-17 at 15:45, Matthew Revell wrote:
> sparkes wrote:
> 
> > Bit of a pisser this I really like the new artwork and it's by a british
> > artist.  Bit of a bummer that mozilla has broken it's own licence for it
> > though
> 
> The pics are nice but why even consider non-free artwork, as part of an 
> open source bit of software?
it can't be distributed with the software if it isn't covered by the
software licence.  

Redhat and a few others distribute the artwork seperately.  

Also mozilla are starting to get arsey about the distribution of
software using the mozilla-firebird and other mozilla trademarks as
names that are not part a standard mozilla release.  Debian will always
apply the latest security patches and updates outside of the standard
releases.

If mozilla continue to do this then firebird (as compiled by mozilla)
can be distributed as contributed software (without the artwork) or with
the artwork as non-free.  

By adding new restrictions on their trademarks (outside of the software
licence) they have inadvertantly broken the software licence.

sparkes