3 ms·
Yeah I’m surprised more forks don’t have this issue. Maybe they’re too small for Mozilla to care.
by mattl 3y ago
Yeah I’m surprised more forks don’t have this issue. Maybe they’re too small for Mozilla to care.
- lolinder 3y agoLibreWolf isn't strictly a fork of Firefox, it's a preconfigured installation that locks things down and disables anti-features. So it's strictly accurate to use the Firefox user agent, because that's what actually gets compiled.
- PrimeMcFly 3y agoWasn't the issue with the Iceweasel UA purely on Debian's end, them not like or agreeing to the Firefox terms? I don't think most forks would have that issue
- aragilar 3y agoNo, it was a trademark issue, raised by Mozilla (https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=354622 https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=354622) and seemingly resolved on their (Mozilla's) end (https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=815006 https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=815006). For what it's worth, the recent Rust trademark issue seems to be of a similar vein (and the justifications around the Firefox sound like those used in Rust).
- PrimeMcFly 3y agoThanks for clarifying!
- account42 3y agoCan you provide any evidence that the User Agent name was a trademark issue. As in the name exposed to websites. Because that is the only thing that matters here and also where everyone claims to be a variant of Mozilla for compatibility.
- aragilar 3y agoMozilla apparently fixed this (https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=815006 https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=815006) so it sounds like forks don't have that issue now?