Possible Licensing Violation

[inferenceus]

Ungoogled Chromium's name includes the "Chromium" branding of the upstream Chromium project. Under BSD 3-Clause License, this is not permitted, as stated in the license file itself:

"A permissive license similar to the BSD 2-Clause License, but with a 3rd clause that prohibits others from using the name of the project or its contributors to promote derived products without written consent."

Has Ungoogled Chromium received permission from upstream Chromium to use the "Chromium" branding? If not, the Ungoogled Chromium project seems to be in violation of the upstream project's licensing.

[inferenceus]

Ungoogled Chromium also includes "google" in its name; this seems to also be a licensing violation.

[jstkdng]

And google will try to sue undoxxed devs? lmao This has been discussed before https://github.com/ungoogled-software/ungoogled-chromium/discussions/1757 but nothing has been done yet afaik.

[inferenceus]

Being "undoxxed" means nothing; it's obscurity. The only thing Google/Chromium has to do is contact GitHub about the issue and this project is over. You're pretty naive.

[jstkdng]

You are naive if you think this project dies if this repository is removed. Trying to shut down an open source project with undoxxed devs is a cat and mouse problem that google can't win. They can certainly try and lose money in the process.

[PF4Public]

this is not permitted, as stated in the license file itself

Please provide references baking that claim, because LICENSE file looks as follows:

// Copyright 2015 The Chromium Authors
//
// Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or without
// modification, are permitted provided that the following conditions are
// met:
//
//    * Redistributions of source code must retain the above copyright
// notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer.
//    * Redistributions in binary form must reproduce the above
// copyright notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer
// in the documentation and/or other materials provided with the
// distribution.
//    * Neither the name of Google LLC nor the names of its
// contributors may be used to endorse or promote products derived from
// this software without specific prior written permission.
//
// THIS SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED BY THE COPYRIGHT HOLDERS AND CONTRIBUTORS
// "AS IS" AND ANY EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING, BUT NOT
// LIMITED TO, THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR
// A PARTICULAR PURPOSE ARE DISCLAIMED. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE COPYRIGHT
// OWNER OR CONTRIBUTORS BE LIABLE FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL,
// SPECIAL, EXEMPLARY, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES (INCLUDING, BUT NOT
// LIMITED TO, PROCUREMENT OF SUBSTITUTE GOODS OR SERVICES; LOSS OF USE,
// DATA, OR PROFITS; OR BUSINESS INTERRUPTION) HOWEVER CAUSED AND ON ANY
// THEORY OF LIABILITY, WHETHER IN CONTRACT, STRICT LIABILITY, OR TORT
// (INCLUDING NEGLIGENCE OR OTHERWISE) ARISING IN ANY WAY OUT OF THE USE
// OF THIS SOFTWARE, EVEN IF ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE.

Which looks to me like a pretty normal BSD 3-Clause License which prohibits promotion in the name of Google or contributors.

[acoolstraw]

:rotating_light: SHILL ALERT :rotating_light:

[Ph0rk0z]

Thank for your "concern".

The bigger threat is going to be manifest v3 as a browser without ublock is going to be unusable.

[PF4Public]

This is an old issue, that didn't show much activity recently — closing. If you have any more information to add, let us know.