解放する／自由な ソフトウェア? You can't just give it away
Who could かもしれない be upset with the Mozilla 創立／基礎 for giving Firefox away?
One of my 役割s at the 創立／基礎 relates to copyright licensing. I'm 責任がある making sure that the ソフトウェア we 分配する 尊敬（する）・点s the 条件s of the 解放する／自由な ソフトウェア licences of the underlying code. I'm also the first point of 接触する for licensing questions. Most of the time, this 職業 伴う／関わるs helping people who want to use our code in their own 製品s understand the 条件, or advising 事業／計画（する） members who want to 統合する code from another 事業／計画（する） into our codebase. Occasionally, however, something a little more unusual comes along.
A little while ago, I received an email from a lady in the 貿易（する）ing 基準s department of a large northern town. They had 遭遇（する）d 商売／仕事s which were selling copies of Firefox, and 手配中の，お尋ね者 to 確認する that this was in 違反 of our licence 協定s before taking 活動／戦闘 against them.
I wrote 支援する, politely explaining the 原則s of copyleft ? that the ソフトウェア was 解放する／自由な, both as in speech and as in price, and that people copying and redistributing it was a feature, not a bug. I said that selling verbatim copies of Firefox on physical マスコミ was 絶対 罰金 with us, and we would like her to return any 押収するd CDs and 許す us to continue with our 計画（する） for world 支配 (or words to that 影響). Unfortunately, this was not 井戸／弁護士席 received. Her reply was incredulous:
“I can't believe that your company would 許す people to make money from something that you 許す people to have 解放する／自由な 接近 to. Is this really the 事例／患者?”, she asked. “If Mozilla 許す the sale of copied 見解／翻訳／版s of its ソフトウェア, it makes it 事実上 impossible for us, from a practical point of 見解（をとる）, to 施行する UK anti-piracy 法律制定, as it is difficult for us to give general advice to 商売／仕事s over what is/is not permitted.”
I felt somewhat unnerved at 存在 held 責任がある the disintegration of the UK anti-piracy system. Who would have thought giving away ソフトウェア could 原因（となる） such difficulties? However, given that the 解放する／自由な ソフトウェア movement is ありそうもない collectively to decide to go proprietary ーするために make her life easier, I had another go, using examples like Linux and the OpenOffice.org office 控訴 to show that it's not just Firefox which is throwing a spanner in the 作品.
She then asked me to identify myself, so that she could 確認する that I was authorised to speak for the Mozilla 創立／基礎 on this 事柄. I wondered if she was imagining nefarious copyright-（規則などを）破る／侵害するing street 仲買人s taking a few moments off from shouting about the price of 気が狂って to pop into an Internet cafe, 割れ目 a router and 迎撃する her email.
However, the more I thought about it, 供給するing a sensible reply to that question is somewhat difficult. How could I 証明する I was authorised to speak for the 創立／基礎? We're a 事実上の organisation ? we have three 従業員s, one in Vancouver, one in Virginia, and one in leafy North London, with no office or 登録（する）d 貿易（する）ing 演説（する）／住所 in the UK. As far as the Mozilla part of my life goes, my entire 存在 is electronic.
In the end, I just had to say that the fact that I am 有能な of receiving and replying to email 演説（する）／住所d to licensing@mozilla.org would have to be 十分な. She would just have to take it on 信用 that I was not a router-割れ目ing 白人指導者べったりの東洋人 merchant. She must have done so, as I never heard from her again.
While the 身元 立証 面 of this 出来事/事件 is amusing, what is more serious is the 始める，決める of 仮定／引き受けることs her emails 暗示するd. It 論証するs how the 解放する／自由な ソフトウェア model 混乱に陥れる／中断させるs the old proprietary way of doing things, where copying was 窃盗 and you were 有罪の until proven innocent.
In a world where both types of ソフトウェア 存在する, greater discernment is 要求するd on the part of the enforcers. I hope this is the beginning of the end of any (a)自動的な／(n)自動拳銃 仮定／引き受けること that 株ing ソフトウェア with your 隣人 must be a 罪，犯罪.
(C) 2006 The Times