darthcamaro writes "So Mozilla has come around and is taking the concerns of Ubuntu (and others) about the Firefox EULA seriously. In fact Mozilla told InternetNews.com that the EULA itself is flawed and will be replaced with something 'else.'
"There is a need for something, something to explain the license I'm not sure I would call it a EULA because that has a meaning to many people of adding restrictions to software and we won't be doing that," Baker said. "We'll be having a license agreement much as Red Hat has a license agreement that says the software is available under the GPL and don't use our trademarks etcetera. So we'll have a license agreement but we won't think of it as a EULA."" Link to Original Source
This discussion was created for logged-in users only, but now has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
EULA or licence?? (Score:2)
If it's a licence and not an EULA, then I should be able to cancel it, and still use the product (although I would not be licenced to distribute it).
If you must agree to the terms and click "accept" in order to use it, then it's an EULA.