287
Firefox's new ad: "It’s time to come back to Firefox. The Internet you loved is still here." (youtu.be)
submitted 2 days ago by to c/firefox@lemmy.ml
94 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 13 points 1 day ago (7 children)

A gentle reminder that Firefox executable is no longer open source. It’s source available.

What does that mean? What do you mean by the executable is not Open Source? Firefox project is hosted online and can be used to build Firefox. Or do you suggest that Firefox builds include binary blobs?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
    •
  • [–] 5 points 1 day ago (6 children)

    Mozilla follows the same model is Microsoft Code with Firefox that the source code is FOSS but it's bineries are not.

    Firefox, the executable application, is not open source and is considered "source available" because the Terms of Service contains exclusions that are against the tenants of freedoms that must exist in open source software.

    Firefox, the source code, is still licensed via Mozilla Public License and is open source. If you compile it yourself, you must call it something other than Firefox.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] 16 points 1 day ago* (1 child)

    Firefox, its logo, etc are trademarked and therefore restrictions apply when re-distributing, and that has been the case for as long as I remember. There's nothing stopping you from compiling it yourself, calling it Firefox, or using their branding, as long as you don't redistribute your build and modifications to others while still using their branding.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 13 points 1 day ago (3 children)

    I don't think that is how Open Source works. Terms of Service in the build doesn't change Firefox being Open Source. If the Source code is open Source, then so is the Firefox build, if nothing else is added that is not Open Source. Also according to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mozilla_Public_License the license is compatible with GPL v2 and Debian FSG, is approved by FSF and OSI.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] -5 points 1 day ago (2 children)

    If the Source code is open Source, then so is the Firefox build

    If that's the case, Mozilla wouldn't have spent so much publicity and gotton so much shit a year+ ago for removing the MPL from their executable and developing their TOS.

    And even if it did, their TOS contains provisions that they can use your telemetry for any reason and they initially said they wouldn't use it to train AI and then they admitted that they use it to train AI. So even you give them the broadest interpretation of OSS, there are still reasons not to use Firefox executable and use an alternative instead.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 5 points 1 day ago

    That is not the broadest interpretation of OSS, if it is GPLv2 compatible and the FSF and OSI approve it to be Open Source conform. Collecting telemetry has nothing to do with a project being Open Source or not.

    Your arguments are baseless, unless you can point to what you exactly mean. Can you point to something specific in the license that I can check? Does the Firefox contain anything proprietary? How is the MPL removed, if that is the license of the project? You need to be specific.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 1 day ago

    I don't recall anything about the MPL being removed from the executable. It's also absolutely possible (and has frequently happened) to get a lot of publicity about something minor or irrelevant.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent