14 ms·
Beyond the fact that there are some pretty clear license violations here that will get you shut down instantly, doesn't the idea of an entire browser centered a
by dgrin91 2y ago
Beyond the fact that there are some pretty clear license violations here that will get you shut down instantly, doesn't the idea of an entire browser centered around a single plugin just seem bad?
I get it, modern internet without an adblocker sucks, I use UBO as well. But you want to build an maintain a browser just for UBO? Why not use firefox in that case?
- tempest_tech 2y agoWe didn’t create the browser with commercial success in mind — there’s no monetisation associated with it. Our goal is to address a practical problem faced by uBO Chrome users in a way we can. If it gains sufficient traction among them, and not only, we’d consider it a successful initiative. Of course, using Firefox is a choice we fully respect. This project was created in the spirit of offering users users with more options.
- dgrin91 2y agoThats not how licensing works.... You are using UBO's likeness without their permission. Commercial success does not affecting licensing requirements. Also it seems like your company makes custom browsers, and you put your company name on it, so this is effectively an ad for you, which means success of this browser will be commercially beneficial to you.
- ranger_danger 2y ago> We didn’t create the browser with commercial success in mind Then where's the source? And why are you making white-label browsers?