[Project_owners] Google Browser Sync Settings extension (Aaron, you there?)

Michael Buckley michael.buckley at hotmail.com
Wed Sep 27 16:59:28 EDT 2006

I wish Philip Chee would post his opinion, I know he reads a lot of
gecko law

Gareth Hunt wrote:
>I think this is what HJ found objectionable:
>"Google grants you a personal, non-transferable and non-exclusive right and 
>license to use the object code of its Software on a single computer limited 
>strictly to non-commercial use only by you; provided that you do not (and 
>do not allow any third party to) copy, modify, create a derivative work of, 
>reverse engineer, reverse assemble or otherwise attempt to discover any 
>source code, sell, assign, sublicense, grant a security interest in or 
>otherwise transfer any right in the Software. You agree not to modify the 
>Software in any manner or form, or to use modified versions of the 
>Software, including (without limitation) for the purpose of obtaining 
>unauthorized access to Google services. You agree not to access Google 
>services by any means other than through the interface that is provided by 
>Google for use in accessing Google services."
>Given that Mozilla products are released under a MPL/GPL/LGPL tri-license 
>(see http://www.mozilla.org/MPL/), are Google in breach of the licence in 
>not making the source for their extension(s) available?  Or are extension 
>developers free to release code under any licence they please?
>I'm not a lawyer and cannot pretend to understand this stuff.  Does anyone 
>have any insight? (Also, is this going off-topic for the list?)
>----- Original Message ----
>From: eric.jung at yahoo.com
>To: project_owners at mozdev.org
>Sent: Tuesday, 26 September, 2006 8:22:03 PM
>Subject: Re: [Project_owners] Google Browser Sync Settings extension 
>(Aaron, you there?)
>HJ van Rantwijk wrote:
>>Oh dear, I can't help you any further, not after reading the license.
>Heh. I didn't even read the license--I just downloaded the xpi to look at 
>the source; I didn't install it. Out of curiosity, what did you find 
>objectionable in the license?
>Michael Buckley wrote:
>>I though that extensions could not be proprietary according to Mozilla 
>>requirements about extension licenses.<
>You're probably thinking of mozdev.org. Google Browser Sync isn't hosted 
>there, so it's not subject to mozdev rules.
>Anyone else able to help?
>Project_owners mailing list
>Project_owners at mozdev.org

Windows Live Spaces: share up to 500 photos per month, free 

More information about the Project_owners mailing list