The dispute revolves around a Firefox 3.0 end-user license agreement (EULA) that has been incorporated into the Intrepid Ibex version of Ubuntu (read ZDNet's Adrian Kingsley-Hughes. The Firefox 3.0 EULA was noted as a bug on Launchpad on Saturday by William Grant, an Ubuntu developer. Shuttleworth has claimed that the EULA's inclusion had been requested for trademarking purposes by Mozilla, the organization behind the Firefox browser.
"Starting up a certain 3.0.2 version of Firefox browser makes available to you a very capital[ized] end-user license agreement," wrote Grant. "This agreement is obnoxious and largely irrelevant to Ubuntu users."
Another Ubuntu developer, known as 'Nullack', wrote that, if the EULA did not limit the user, there was no need to show it. However, "if the license of Firefox is different and requires special consideration, then that alarms me", wrote the developer.
"One of the chief attributes of Ubuntu is the license it comes with, and I don't want to have to analyze how this affects me as a user, with Firefox potentially changing the license," wrote Nullack.
Mark Shuttleworth, Canonical's chief executive, wrote back to say that Mozilla Corporation had requested the EULA be included for trademark reasons.
"Mozilla Corporation asked that this be added in order for us to continue to call the browser 'Firefox'," wrote Shuttleworth.
"Since Firefox is their trademark, which we intend to respect, we have the choice of working with Mozilla to meet their requirements or switching to an unbranded browser."
Shuttleworth wrote that he recognized the importance of brand to a product, but he said a EULA was not "best practice" in his opinion.
"I would not consider a EULA as a best practice," wrote Shuttleworth. "It's unfortunate that Mozilla feels this is absolutely necessary, but they do, and none of us are in a position to be experts about the legal constraints which Mozilla feels apply to them."
Shuttleworth criticized those members of the Ubuntu developer community who feared that a EULA would take away their digital rights.
"Your software freedoms are built on legal grounds, as are Mozilla's rights in the Firefox trademark," wrote Shuttleworth. "To act as though your rights are being infringed misses the point of free software by a mile."
Shuttleworth added that a package called "abrowser" was being developed in Intrepid Ibex which uses Firefox's code base without the Firefox trademark.
Mozilla Corporation had not responded to a request for comment at the time of writing.