"Mozilla Licensing Policies" link on /press/images.html goes to self

VERIFIED FIXED in 3.0

Status

--
major
VERIFIED FIXED
11 years ago
6 years ago

People

(Reporter: stephend, Assigned: reed)

Tracking

unspecified

Firefox Tracking Flags

(Not tracked)

Details

(Whiteboard: [server side][broken link], URL)

(Reporter)

Description

11 years ago
On https://www-firefox3.authstage.mozilla.com/en-US/press/images.html, the link to "Mozilla Licensing Policies" links to itself; not sure _exactly_ where it should go, but probably https://www-firefox3.authstage.mozilla.com/en-US/about/licensing.html?
Fixed in r12817 (I linked to the licensing page as suggested).
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Last Resolved: 11 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
(Reporter)

Comment 2

11 years ago
I should've mentioned that production links to http://www.mozilla.org/foundation/licensing.html.

I confess that I don't understand why we have both http://www.mozilla.org/foundation/licensing.html and https://www-firefox3.authstage.mozilla.com/en-US/about/licensing.html, nor their differences.

Whom would know, John?  Gerv?  Cathleen?
Well, I don't think I can access https://www-firefox3.authstage.mozilla.com/ ... Assuming it's the same as http://www.mozilla.com/en-US/about/licensing.html , then agree that it's duplication. Does anyone know why mozilla.com ended up with a copy of this page?

Gerv


(Reporter)

Comment 4

11 years ago
(In reply to comment #3)
> Well, I don't think I can access https://www-firefox3.authstage.mozilla.com/
> ... Assuming it's the same as http://www.mozilla.com/en-US/about/licensing.html
> , then agree that it's duplication. Does anyone know why mozilla.com ended up
> with a copy of this page?
> 
> Gerv

I emailed Gerv privately with user/pass info for the Mozilla.com redesign; note that the pages are not identical, but are still close enough to be confusing.

The .com page looks like an older copy of the .org page, which I maintain. Unless someone objects, I'd suggest linking any links to the .com version to the .org version. (It does mention the mozilla.com EULA, so that's fine.)

Gerv
Should this be re-opened? John?

Comment 7

11 years ago
I'm not sure how the .com site wound up with this content since it also exists on the .org site...that's before my time.

What I do know is that I made some relatively minor copy edits to the .com version (not even realizing that there was an identical .org version) to make it read better. There was some very awkward language in there that I felt needed to be cleaned up for our consumer-facing site. As far as I can tell, I didn't change the intent or meaning of the copy at all.

Having said all that, I'm happy to remove this page from Mozilla.com altogether and have all relevant links point to Mozilla.org if that's what Gerv thinks is best. But, before we do that, I'd like to at least consider the possibility of updating the .org page's text too.

If there are other implications to removing this page from the .com site that I might not be aware of, please let me know.
John, if we remove this page, should the Licensing item in the About menu (both in the header flydown menu, and the right-side menu on all About pages? Or, should it stay and link to the .org page? If we link to the .org page, it might be a bit strange to have one of these links go off-site. 
(Reporter)

Updated

11 years ago
Status: RESOLVED → REOPENED
Resolution: FIXED → ---

Comment 9

11 years ago
I'd like to hear back from Gerv on this before we decide what to do. But, if we end up removing the page from .com, it still seems like we should keep at least one prominent link to the .org version of the page.

Let's figure out the best way to do that when we hear from Gerv...I'm open to all suggestions on this.
I suggest we remove the .com page, replacing it with a redirect to the .org page (just in case any links are missed). Let's keep all the links where they are, but just repoint them. I think the licensing information is important. I don't think it's an issue that it's "off-site" - we are working together very closely :-)

If there are stylistic edits to .com which apply to .org, feel free to make them (or tell me what they are, if doing a checkout is a hassle).


Gerv

Comment 11

11 years ago
Thanks Gerv. That makes sense to me, but before we proceed, I just want to get one last opinion from Harvey, who I've copied on this bug.
(Reporter)

Comment 12

11 years ago
Harvey: when you get a chance, could you comment on comment 10?  Thanks!
Severity: normal → major
Flags: blocking-firefox3?
Flags: blocking-firefox3? → blocking-firefox3+
Whiteboard: [server side][broken link][needs input harvey]

Comment 13

11 years ago
Concur with the proposal in Comment 10. hja

Comment 14

11 years ago
(In reply to comment #13)
> Concur with the proposal in Comment 10. hja
Thanks Harvey!

So, with that in mind, here are the next steps:
- Steven, please remove this page from Mozilla.com and instead point the "licensing" link in the Mozilla.com About section to http://www.mozilla.org/foundation/licensing.html
- Gerv, this isn't really a rush, but would you mind updating the content on the Mozilla.org page to contain this slightly rewritten intro? The only changes are stylistic ones to make it read better...there aren't any material differences. Here's the text:

Mozilla’s software is open source. This means that the software is not only available for download free of charge, but you have access to the source code and may modify and redistribute our software subject to certain restrictions as detailed in the Mozilla Public License. Official binary releases from the Mozilla Foundation are also released under the Mozilla End-User License Agreement.

Although our code is free, it is very important that we strictly enforce our trademark rights in order to keep them valid. Our trademarks include, among others, the names Mozilla, Firefox, Thunderbird, Bugzilla and XUL, as well as the Mozilla logo, Firefox logo, Thunderbird logo and the red lizard logo. This means that, while you have considerable freedom to redistribute and modify our software, there are tight restrictions on your ability to use the Mozilla name and logos, even when built into binaries that we provide.

John: I can look at that in the next 24 hours.

Gerv
Can we file a new bug for the mozilla.org stuff so we can get this one closed?

Comment 17

11 years ago
(In reply to comment #16)
> Can we file a new bug for the mozilla.org stuff so we can get this one closed?
I just filed bug 439479...closing this one out.

Thanks all-

Status: REOPENED → RESOLVED
Last Resolved: 11 years ago11 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED

Comment 18

11 years ago
Ooops...reopening this one b/c the redirect isn't in place yet. Sorry about jumping the gun here...it'll be closed soon.
Status: RESOLVED → REOPENED
Resolution: FIXED → ---
Removed the .com version of the Licensing page and changed all links to point to the .org version in r15747.

Reassigning to reed for the redirect.
Assignee: steven → reed
Status: REOPENED → NEW
(Assignee)

Comment 20

11 years ago
Sending        .htaccess
Transmitting file data .
Committed revision 15834.
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Last Resolved: 11 years ago11 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
Whiteboard: [server side][broken link][needs input harvey] → [server side][broken link]
How localized versions should proceed?
Component: www.mozilla.org/firefox → www.mozilla.org
Product: Websites → Websites
Component: www.mozilla.org → General
Product: Websites → www.mozilla.org
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.