Comment 436 for bug 269656

lord_alan wrote:
> 2. I would really appreciate it if Ubuntu/Canonical (if Mozilla can't or
> wont) could distribute Firefox with the Website Services disabled by
> default (we are running Linux after all so their benefit is a somewhat
> moot point) so that the need for the 'user agreement' becomes a
> requirement only *after* the user has made a concious choice to turn on
> these services.
>
We could do this, yes, but I think that would be a significant loss. The
services are not anti-virus (and hence of less value on Linux), they are
anti-phishing. Unfortunately, the phishing virus affects the human brain
and not the OS :-/ so I think launching Firefox on Linux without the
anti-phishing service would be significantly less safe than IE on
Windows with their anti-phishing service.

We have been driving hard to get a good result here (and publishing the
EULA-version was part of that driving process) that specifically sets a
good precedent for integrated network services. Such services will be a
feature of the future of software, and even where that software is
FLOSS, we want to be able to take advantage of the available set of
services.

Services, unlike software, will always come with terms of use. There are
terms of use involved every time you use Google, Ebay, Yahoo, Wikipedia,
Sourceforge, and like it or not your use of the service usually
constitutes assent to those terms.

We wanted here to establish some key ideas:

 - that the presentation of terms should be non-blocking. You should not
have to "click to accept" (we accomplished that in the initial version)
 - that the terms should be presented only when the service is being
invoked (the latest mockups are close to that)
 - that the terms should not be intrusive on your use of space (the
latest mockups are, in my view, acceptable in that regard)

In addition, there is going to be a lot of discussion about what sorts
of terms are acceptable to people who are aware to issues of
intellectual property, data protection and the value of the digital
commons. I.e. - you and me. We don't yet have a view on that, there is
no "GPL for Services" but we expect one to emerge over the next few
years, and this work by Mozilla is an important first step.

I should say that Mozilla has been very responsive once this issue was
clearly on the public table, and they are clearly committed to the
values that we hold dear. Organisations always have a diversity of
thinking on a subject, and it's important to see what the leaders do
once something is firmly on their agenda. In this case, Mozilla's
leaders have been quick to stand for the things that most people here
care about. As someone said, this EULA hasn't landed in a stable
release, this has been part of the development process and we expect to
have a good position in place before Intrepid's RC.

Mark