Full thing pulled. I found a way to do it without portable menu that works great and don't want to deal with the politics related to this post.
New: Run-Command (Dec 2, 2024), Platform 29.5.3 (Jun 27, 2024)
1,100+ portable packages, 1.1 billion downloads
No Ads Nov/Dec!, Please donate today
Visit the Community page
Join our forums
Subscribe to our email newsletter
Subscribe with RSS
Follow us on Facebook
Follow us on LinkedIn
Follow us on Twitter
Follow us on Mastodon
Follow us on BlueSky
John,
I asked the opinion of the IRC, I was considering killing the link, they are of the view that it is not really Google Chrome, but is in fact Chromium.
What do I know
Just thought I'd let you know.
Tim
Things have got to get better, they can't get worse, or can they?
If you compiled Chromium from source for this you can't call it Google Chrome. I believe that goes against the license.
Signature automatically removed for being too awesome.
1. It's called "Google Chrome" and they apparently bought the domain to capitalize on it.
2. They're not making the Chromium source available on their own servers as required by the GPL
3. It's using a closed source launcher
Sometimes, the impossible can become possible, if you're awesome!
Oh yeah, capitalizing on the Google Chrome name is a CLEAR violation of the license.
Signature automatically removed for being too awesome.
Chromium is developed by Google. It is open source, with all of their stuff under the BSD license. Some of the stuff that they have used is under other OSI-approved licenses though.
Google® Chrome ( or ®, not sure which :P) is a fork of Chromium, also by Google, which has Google branding, is closed source, is integrated with the Google Updater, and has an additional EULA attached to it. Google has registered the trademark "Google Chrome", in a way similar to Mozilla and Firefox etc., where they have registered those as trademarks, to protect the identify of the product.
Also, "capitalising on the Google Chrome name" is not a violation of the license at all, it is perfectly legal, perfectly understandable, and really the same as Mozilla with Firefox. Or wait, is this someone else that's bought googlechrome.com? If so, Google can take them to court and really get the domain free of charge. That part is in violation of laws.
On point 2 of John's comment, is it really necessary to host the code for the whole app on your site? That's not needed by the GPL, you just need to be able to give it to them if they ask for it at a cost no greater than what you charged for it. (Thus for our apps, that will be free.) I'm not sure about the BSD license though.
I can't comment on point 3 of John's comment, as I haven't seen it.
Summary:
There, I hope that that makes sense.
I am a Christian and a developer and moderator here.
“A soft answer turns away wrath, but a harsh word stirs up anger.” – Proverbs 15:1