Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

MetaLab Accuses Mozilla of Ripping Off UI Elements In Mockups

timothy posted more than 4 years ago | from the classic-miscommunication dept.

Canada 159

CWmike writes "Canadian interface design firm MetaLab has accused Mozilla of stealing user interface elements for a development tool in the browser maker's Jetpack project, which aims to simplify add-on making. MetaLab leveled the charges on Tuesday when the 11-person firm's founder, Andrew Wilkinson, blogged about the similarities between his company's designs and those posted by Mozilla for FlightDeck, a Jetpack editor. 'What they did was pretty ridiculous,' Wilkinson said on Thursday. 'There's a difference between inspiration versus ripping something off,' he said. 'The measurements of the graphic elements [Mozilla took from us] were the exact same, the very same pixels. When someone takes your images from the server hosting them, that's crossing the line.' Mozilla apologized to MetaLab on Wednesday, saying in a blog post, 'While the design direction being implemented does not utilize these design elements, we inadvertently included the early mockups in our blog post and video announcing the next phase of development for the Jetpack SDK ... We sincerely apologize to MetaLab for incorporating design elements from their web site in our early mockups and for posting them publicly without proper attribution.'" Alexander Limi of the Firefox User Experience Team points out that MetaLab has accepted the apology, too — worth bearing in mind.

cancel ×

159 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Open source, steal? (5, Insightful)

nacturation (646836) | more than 4 years ago | (#31447868)

Without stealing of ideas, we wouldn't have Open Office which implemented feature-for-feature what Microsoft Office has. Without stealing, we wouldn't have KDE and Gnome with implemented many features from Windows and OS X. How could open source survive without it? :)

Re:Open source, steal? (5, Insightful)

The Turd Burglar (1765270) | more than 4 years ago | (#31447878)

How could open source survive without it? :)

Coming up with your own ideas instead of cloning everyone else's?

Re:Open source, steal? (1)

Cryacin (657549) | more than 4 years ago | (#31448158)

Blame it on Canada!

Re:Open source, steal? (1)

JustOK (667959) | more than 4 years ago | (#31448398)

That's pretty original, eh?

Re:Open source, steal? (3, Insightful)

Fluffeh (1273756) | more than 4 years ago | (#31448264)

How could open source survive without it? :)

Coming up with your own ideas instead of cloning everyone else's?

That depends on what your open source project is. If you want to replace a current application with an open source one, coming up with your own ideas of how to implement it won't be the best option. If I wanted my company to replace their versions of Microsoft Word with an open source word processor, I would want the application to reliably and hopefully in a simple way do all that Microsoft Word currently does. There is no point in making a word processor if it's so different and can do all these other things if it can't do the things I need it to do.

Coming up with ideas has nothing to do with open/prop source.

When making something new, to look into a market/niche that isn't being catered for currently, come up with new ideas, do things that no-one has done already. Be creative. When trying to take a market from someone else or to replace a product, copy the functionality features - but even at that point, it would be better to look at how those functions and features might be improved in the process. Giving someone a product that does exactly the same thing won't give them any incentive at all to change. Giving them a product that does the same things, but better/simpler/easier/quicker is when you will have a product worth swapping to.

Re:Open source, steal? (4, Insightful)

PitaBred (632671) | more than 4 years ago | (#31448296)

That's impossible. You can't live in a vacuum, and EVERYTHING is derivative to one degree or another.

Re:Open source, steal? (3, Insightful)

The Turd Burglar (1765270) | more than 4 years ago | (#31448330)

There's a difference between being derivative and being an attempt at a 1:1 copy.

Re:Open source, steal? (4, Funny)

paeanblack (191171) | more than 4 years ago | (#31448420)

There's a difference between being derivative and being an attempt at a 1:1 copy.

I disagree.

Cheers,
--e^x

Re:Open source, steal? (1)

FooAtWFU (699187) | more than 4 years ago | (#31448566)

There's a difference between being derivative and being an attempt at a 1:1 copy.

I disagree.

Cheers,
--fooatwfu

Re:Open source, steal badly (1)

ogl_codemonkey (706920) | more than 4 years ago | (#31448570)

Thr's a diffrnce btwn bing drivative and bing an attmpt at a 1:1 copy.

I disagr.

Chrs,
--^x

Re:Open source, steal? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31449088)

I disagrrrr

--Tiggerrr

Re:Open source, steal? (2, Funny)

Smoke2Joints (915787) | more than 4 years ago | (#31448372)

Thats impossible, even for a computer.

Re:Open source, steal? (2, Funny)

ae1294 (1547521) | more than 4 years ago | (#31448414)

Coming up with your own ideas instead of cloning everyone else's?

Xerox called and offered you a job to speak out against Microsoft and Apple for stealing all their really good ideas. I told them you thought that stealing their money for something you do for free would be stealing... They said they fully understood and also welcomed me to something called the 'Tautology club'.... I'm not sure if I'm sure about what that word really means...

Re:Open source, steal? (1)

jim_v2000 (818799) | more than 4 years ago | (#31448812)

Fuck that. If something is a good idea, everyone should use it. If you don't like it, patent it or copyright it. Oh, you can't? Tough.

Re:Open source, steal? (2, Insightful)

commodore64_love (1445365) | more than 4 years ago | (#31447926)

Without stealing, we wouldn't have many works of Shakespeare or Bach, both of whom copied liberally from their Italian counterparts. (Of course that was before copyright existed, hence plagiarism of ideas was not only legal, but accepted.)

Re:Open source, steal? (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31448514)

If we lump patents with copyrights, that was also the time when people who invented great stuff tended to die in poverty after the entire western world "stole their imaginary property" (a.k.a. "was inspired by their ideas"):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samuel_Crompton

Re:Open source, steal? (4, Insightful)

hairyfeet (841228) | more than 4 years ago | (#31449040)

Oh please! Can we let this old 'for the starving (insert authors/inventors/artists) bullshit just DIAF already? Sure that was true back when copyrights were first invented, you know when they were actually SANE, but that time has been gone for decades now. All copyrights and patents do know is crush the little guy who can't compete with supermegacorp who has a patent warchest or pile of copyrights the size of the great pyramids.

You want proof? One sentence-Steamboat Willie is STILL under copyright. Than man has been dead since before cars had seatbelts, yet one of his first works, made when planes were made of cloth and antibiotics were but a dream, is STILL under copyrights! This gross abuse of power is why innovation in this country (with the exception of laws and ponzi schemes) is pretty much dead, as the only way to survive the patent trolls and other leeches is to sell out to some multinational who will give you pennies while they rake in the truckloads of cash.

So please, just put down the Ayn Rand and smell the fail, okay? All this "IP" crap has done is give supermegacorps like Disney enough cash to buy out every politician on the planet, while making sure the little guy doesn't have a chance in hell. it is like all this stupidity of record companies suing each other because one of their bands made a song that sounds like something already in their catalog. Well duh! There are only 12 notes in the western scale, and thanks to copyrights being "forever minus a single day" now the odds of find 4 or 5 chords that don't grate on your ears that someone else hadn't ever played before is pretty much zilch. Or should we stop all artists from recording now because it may infringe on some supermegacorp's back catalog?

Re:Open source, steal? (1)

BrokenHalo (565198) | more than 4 years ago | (#31448524)

Without stealing, we wouldn't have many works of Shakespeare or Bach, both of whom copied liberally from their Italian counterparts.

Name one instance where Bach plagiarised. He did use some Italian forms in his music, but that is not plagiarism.

Re:Open source, steal? (1)

contrapunctus (907549) | more than 4 years ago | (#31448624)

Bach's keyboard (organ and harpsichord) concertos of Vivaldi's violin concertos (for four violins is a an example, can't remember the numbers)

Re:Open source, steal? (2, Interesting)

BrokenHalo (565198) | more than 4 years ago | (#31448826)

Those are widely recognised to be taken from transcriptions that he made, and never published under his own name. This was common practice in the Baroque period as a means of studying a composer's work.

However, your remark about composers borrowing from each other is correct. Vivaldi borrowed extensively from Ruggieri and Corelli.

Re:Open source, steal? (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31447960)

Without stealing, we wouldn't have KDE and Gnome with implemented many features from Windows and OS X.

Exactly. The worst part was how the KDE team went FORWARD in time, completely ripped off Windows 7 and then went BACK in time and implemented KDE4 before Windows 7 was even in beta! The nerve!

(Anonymous for obvious reasons)

Re:Open source, steal? (5, Funny)

The End Of Days (1243248) | more than 4 years ago | (#31448036)

(Anonymous for obvious reasons)

Yeah, defending KDE on Slashdot is very risky.

Re:Open source, steal? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31448380)

I like to think of it as Windows: KDawson Edition.

Re:Open source, steal? (1)

Ihmhi (1206036) | more than 4 years ago | (#31448920)

In Windows: KDawson Edition, there's no spellchecker and Internet Explorer 5's home page is automatically and irrevocably set to Fark.

Re:Open source, steal? (1)

ae1294 (1547521) | more than 4 years ago | (#31448444)

Yeah, defending KDE on Slashdot is very risky.

Well you do have to watch out for gromes... I hear they have sharp pointy teeth and a horrible child-like voice that is very unnerving and rather unexpected giving their demonic nature...

Re:Open source, steal? (0, Flamebait)

The Turd Burglar (1765270) | more than 4 years ago | (#31448074)

Windows 7 development started in 2006. So according to you they went forward in time to steal things from KDE 4 before KDE 4 was even released in it's first alpha?

Re:Open source, steal? (5, Interesting)

Windwraith (932426) | more than 4 years ago | (#31448328)

You just need to search Slashdot, when the first screenshots of Windows 7 came out, many compared it to KDE4. Now everyone compares Seven to KDE4...which is unfair, as history shows otherwise. I doubt Aaron Seigo and related folks had inside views of Seven's development.
But as the parent implies, it seems defending KDE4 is a risky position here, I wonder why. Qt is free now, and KDE is as much of a windows clone as most window managers out there, with a taskbar and titlebars. Gnome is a windows clone too.

Re:Open source, steal? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31448416)

And widows is an alto clone :P

Re:Open source, steal? (1)

Philip_the_physicist (1536015) | more than 4 years ago | (#31448408)

So, It turns out that both dev teams went forwards in time and stole features from the other.

Now, what I'd like to know is why they can't get the patches while they're at it, so they have bug-free products.

Re:Open source, steal? (1)

BrokenHalo (565198) | more than 4 years ago | (#31448550)

I haven't used Windows 7 yet, but I hope it's a bit more intuitive than KDE4 was. Until I found out how to make the desktop usable as a place to drop "stuff" in KDE, I found it a pretty frustrating experience.

Re:Open source, steal? (1)

Jazzbunny (1251002) | more than 4 years ago | (#31448102)

And where did they get their time machine from? Plot thickens.

Re:Open source, steal? (2, Funny)

Cryacin (657549) | more than 4 years ago | (#31448168)

There's been an open source Flux Capacitor for years!

Re:Open source, steal? (4, Funny)

gzipped_tar (1151931) | more than 4 years ago | (#31448224)

They've been keeping it in an amusement part since the UN's victory over the Nazis led by Charlie Chaplin. BTW, Godwined.

Re:Open source, steal? (2, Interesting)

psithurism (1642461) | more than 4 years ago | (#31447972)

Without stealing of ideas, we wouldn't have Open Office which implemented feature-for-feature what Microsoft Office has. Without stealing, we wouldn't have KDE and Gnome with implemented many features from Windows and OS X. How could open source survive without it? :)

Microsoft Word is the standard in word processing, it was reasonable to get a half functional free equivalent for users who couldn't run MSWord, but mozilla is huge and quite capabable of creating their own designs, while the firm they stole from is much smaller and not a standard in any way.

Re:Open source, steal? (1)

Stephenmg (265369) | more than 4 years ago | (#31448014)

Your examples aren't the same as what happened here. It's not that MetaLab's product influenced the design elements in Mozzila's Jetpack, It's the fact that the gui elements are exactly the same. None of your examples are exactly the same and some of them have even gone back the other direction with open source software inspiring closed source software. Too be fair to Mozzila though, it was just a mock-up which is aimed at getting the point across.

Re:Open source, steal? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31448032)

There's a difference between creating similar tools to do the same job and copying a user interface pixel for pixel.

Under 30, are you? (2, Insightful)

xzvf (924443) | more than 4 years ago | (#31448038)

Lotus 123, Visicalc, WordPerfect, ... I guess you can give MS PowerPoint.

Re:Under 30, are you? (4, Insightful)

Saint Stephen (19450) | more than 4 years ago | (#31448092)

I guess you forgot Harvard Graphics :-)

Re:Under 30, are you? (1)

Tablizer (95088) | more than 4 years ago | (#31448156)

Indeed. Microsoft stole most of the feature ideas for the products you mentioned form elsewhere. It's cloning the clones.

Re:Open source, steal? (3, Insightful)

digitalchinky (650880) | more than 4 years ago | (#31448222)

Feature for Feature you say? Staroffice started life as "StarWriter" way back when 8 bit processors were cutting edge. I'd say there was and still is quite a lot of 'feature' copying happening on all sides. Probably a lot of what you think of as copying is just common sense GUI design, some of it accidental, but either way, someone has to write the code, it's not like Microsoft released the source.

Re:Open source, steal? (2, Informative)

keeboo (724305) | more than 4 years ago | (#31448244)

Without stealing of ideas, we wouldn't have Open Office which implemented feature-for-feature what Microsoft Office has. Without stealing, we wouldn't have KDE and Gnome with implemented many features from Windows and OS X. How could open source survive without it? :)

Feeling trolly today?

Both Apple and Microsoft copied from Xerox, Lotus etc.
The difference is that, when a FOSS copies from something else, it does not have the chutzpah to claim originality.

Re:Open source, steal? (2, Funny)

PitaBred (632671) | more than 4 years ago | (#31448308)

That's because we sent the OSS marketers along with the telephone sanitizers on the B-ark.

Re:Open source, steal? (1)

nacturation (646836) | more than 4 years ago | (#31448640)

Feeling trolly today?

A little. Hopefully the smiley tempered it.

Re:Open source, steal? (1)

iamhassi (659463) | more than 4 years ago | (#31448784)

"Feeling trolly today?"

Did you read what they're accused of stealing? They're accused of stealing website design.

Here's a photo demonstrating exactly what they're accused of stealing [amazonaws.com]

While I'd admit they look very similar (FlightDeck looks better IMHO) this is the internet, every well designed site ends up on other sites. How many websites look like Amazon? Look at all the identical looking blogs created with wordpress. Honestly MetaLab I think you're mad they took your design and improved upon it.

Re:Open source, steal? (1)

Blakey Rat (99501) | more than 4 years ago | (#31448830)

The difference is that, when a FOSS copies from something else, it does not have the chutzpah to claim originality.

I must have been delusional when I thought I read all those posts on Slashdot Games saying that Frozen Bubble and Battle for Wesnoth were original...

Re:Open source, steal? (1)

keeboo (724305) | more than 4 years ago | (#31448898)

The difference is that, when a FOSS copies from something else, it does not have the chutzpah to claim originality.

I must have been delusional when I thought I read all those posts on Slashdot Games saying that Frozen Bubble and Battle for Wesnoth were original...

Dunno, it's possible someone wrote that. Still, I cannot find any originality claim in either projects' websites.

Personally, I could never understand the fanboyism behind Frozen Bubble. It looks like a (polished) 1980s game.

Re:Open source, steal? (1)

mysidia (191772) | more than 4 years ago | (#31448294)

Without stealing of ideas, MacOS and Windows would not exist. The concept of mouse, windows, and graphical menus belong to PARC/Xerox.

Who never got their opportunity to release a product using the technology, because Apple stole it right out from under them, before it was even published, making Apple 1st to market on technology they stole.

Far more damaging than ripping on a work, when the designer's product is already out, known to the market, and available for purchase.

Re:Open source, steal? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31448464)

I thought Apple licensed that stuff from Xerox. And when Microsoft tried to sue Apple, Xerox stepped in and slapped Microsoft.

Re:Open source, steal? (3, Insightful)

indiechild (541156) | more than 4 years ago | (#31448400)

The same old tired excuse -- did you even look at the article and linked blog entry? This isn't about stealing of ideas, this is stealing work pixel-for-pixel. That's never OK, and has nothing to do with open source or "artistic inspiration".

Re:Open source, steal? (1)

nacturation (646836) | more than 4 years ago | (#31448652)

The same old tired excuse -- did you even look at the article and linked blog entry?

Um... this is Slashdot, right?

Re:Open source, steal? (1)

jim_v2000 (818799) | more than 4 years ago | (#31448850)

> This isn't about stealing of ideas, this is stealing work pixel-for-pixel. That's never OK.

I have two questions. How does one "steal" pixels and why is it not ok? If elements of their UI look good, I say use them. There is NO WAY that it harms the original application, and I'm pretty sure that you can't copyright a piece of a UI.

Re:Open source, steal? (0, Redundant)

h4rr4r (612664) | more than 4 years ago | (#31448412)

Windows and MacOs stole those ideas from Xerox. OSX came later.

Re:Open source, steal? (1)

sjames (1099) | more than 4 years ago | (#31448572)

Without stealing, we'd each have to independently invent the wheel and discover fire.

Re:Open source, steal? (1)

Sulphur (1548251) | more than 4 years ago | (#31448858)

invent the wheel and discover fire

And the Zippo and the Bic

Re:Open source, steal? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31448586)

Does anyone read the article? These guys stole the actual images off of MetaLab, not a fucking idea or a "gist" of their design. What makes it worse is that this is after Mozilla decided that these guys were too expensive and denied their bid.

Snore (4, Insightful)

some_guy_88 (1306769) | more than 4 years ago | (#31447892)

Company does something wrong.

Company apologizes.

Accuser accepts apology.

Slow news day?

Re:Snore (3, Insightful)

gzipped_tar (1151931) | more than 4 years ago | (#31447984)

Considering this is slashdot (and timothy), a story that is not openly aiming at generating hate, flame & modtroll fest is indeed, well, quite a story.

Re:Snore (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31448790)

Safety means more Jew geldings for retirement and possibly the buying-out of an Israeli lobbyist. Timothy could retire comfortably and buy a term of congress' worth of Joe Lieberman's face-time. No small feat there.

Re:Snore (1)

Ihmhi (1206036) | more than 4 years ago | (#31448928)

I see lots of "Oh great, another dumbass post from $EDITOR".

Are there any editors than anyone here likes or thinks is remotely competent whatsoever?

Re:Snore (2, Funny)

ae1294 (1547521) | more than 4 years ago | (#31448594)

Slow news day?

The days are getting so slow around here that they have had to resort to traveling into the distant past to find stories to post.

But yeah everyone keeps saying 1:1 copy - the horror! I bet most of these same people are guilty of doing this with their own program GUI's or websites. Honestly we all know that the 'make it shiny' peoples aren't always the 'make it stable' peoples so this really just isn't a big deal. It's a damn mock up plus the underlining code is totally different. It's not like when Microsoft xor Apple cuts and pastes GNU code into their apps or heck release entire programs they stole from GNU code.

Wait... this is /. so never-mind most of you are working for M$ or Apple while stealing GNU code and masturbating to loli porn about a despotic corporate future state where you can exact your revenge on the children of those who bullied you at the bus stop as a child. You sick twisted aspe fucks totally disgust me..

Or I guess you could just be Opera uses as the effect would be equivalent.

Regardless we will soon find out how true this statement is as I expect a -1 troll or flamebait mod just as soon as you finish cleaning yourselves up. twats...

As the title says, it was only a mockup (4, Informative)

R.Mo_Robert (737913) | more than 4 years ago | (#31447932)

The summary alludes to this, but just in case (since 90% of people who comment probably won't read past the headline):

Update: I just got off the phone with the team at Mozilla, who apologized and clarified a few things. The design which used our site’s design elements was a development build and according to them the design has been changed in newer builds. That said, it was used in their launch video as well as their blog post announcing the product. They told me that that the team who put together the blog post and video was unaware of the similarities at the time of inclusion. We’ve asked for a public apology, and I’ll be doing a follow-up post tomorrow [and they did].

Re:As the title says, it was only a mockup (4, Informative)

X0563511 (793323) | more than 4 years ago | (#31448064)

Note that the headline says just that:

MetaLab Accuses Mozilla of Ripping Off UI Elements in Mockups (emphasis mine)

Re:As the title says, it was only a mockup (4, Funny)

Culture20 (968837) | more than 4 years ago | (#31448236)

LAUNCELOT: Look, my liege!
ARTHUR: Camelot!
GALAHAD: Camelot!
LAUNCELOT: Camelot!
PATSY: It's only a model.

Re:As the title says, it was only a mockup (1)

Yvan256 (722131) | more than 4 years ago | (#31448478)

King Arthur: On second thought, let's not go to Camelot. It is a silly place.

This was a mockup people (5, Insightful)

OnlyJedi (709288) | more than 4 years ago | (#31448006)

So, a company decided to take shortcuts in creating a mockup of a project still in early development, and is being blasted because of it? Seriously, this was nowhere near a final release or even a beta release. It was a mockup, designed solely to get across an idea of what the final product interface would look like. Tasking an art team to create all-new icons and artwork is generally counter to the idea of the quick-and-dirty nature of mockups.

Re:This was a mockup people (1)

Rockoon (1252108) | more than 4 years ago | (#31448106)

Apologists shrug it off. News at 11.

Re:This was a mockup people (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31448112)

So, a company decided to take shortcuts in creating a mockup

No, they showed it to the public. Public demo trumps mockup, and they deserve a bit of flak for this one.

Re:This was a mockup people (1)

QuantumG (50515) | more than 4 years ago | (#31448816)

meh, copyright can fuck right off.. How would you even show damage in a case like this? Stupidity.

Re:This was a mockup people (1)

martas (1439879) | more than 4 years ago | (#31449160)

the only thing worse than a mistake is over-correcting for it.

a world without any copyright/patent law is a sad, sad world. kinda like a world where stealing or murder are legal.

Re:This was a mockup people (4, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31448172)

Well, Mozilla reject their bid proposal, where Metalabs could've earned $XXX for their labor, but went ahead and used their design for their own purposes, regardless if it's just a mockup. It's like if you told potential investors or your great new gadget, and in good faith did not make them sign a NDA (those are so pretentious unless you're *both* very big companies), rejected your idea, but went ahead and placed an RFP, or beta test, or whatever using your idea as a skeleton.

Even something small as a bid proposal takes time and money to put together: from programmers, to art & design guys, to marketing, and sales.

Good thing. (3, Insightful)

Ekuryua (940558) | more than 4 years ago | (#31448010)

Jetpack is pretty much an attempt at making firefox extensions greasemonkey scripts that hold no actual application power. They were talking of removing normal extension support for that fake sugary stuff. Plus the idea that normal people will be making quick extensions is just ridiculous. Making a normal ff extension is not that hard, it's all quite documented and you can take any simple extension as base template if scared...

Re:Good thing. (5, Informative)

FreakCERS (517467) | more than 4 years ago | (#31448486)

I'm sorry, but most of your assertions are blatantly untrue.

1) Extensions created with Jetpack (the actual framework, not the prototype based on ideas from Ubiquity) have to a large extent the same powers as an old-style extension. There is a certain number of capabilities provided, but if you need more, you can write your own capabilities, share them, or indeed use others users shared capabilities.

2) As an official Jetpack Ambassador, and Ubiquity core developer (as previously mentioned, the base of some of the ideas for Jetpack), I can honestly say that I have never heard talks about ditching regular extensions, except from user-comments on sites like Slashdot. Indeed, many of us involved with the project have addressed this issue on several occasions.

3) The idea was never for "normal people" to make extensions, it was to widen the audience from a very few XUL developers (I believe the number is in the low end of 4-5000), to web-developers in general.

There are several interesting possibilities with this, amongst them companies using existing web developers in their employment to create work-flow enhancing extensions quickly, and letting website developers create new ways of interacting with their site. Especially in the latter case, the extensive security model in Jetpack compared with old-style extensions, and the ease of install/uninstall is paramount.

Best regards,
-- cers / Christian Sonne

Re:Good thing. (1)

Ekuryua (940558) | more than 4 years ago | (#31448634)

All the better then.
As I am curious, can a jetpack extension run a background timer independent of any window(as long as the application is running)?
Can a jetpack extension modify chrome elements and behaviours?
If neither of those are true, I don't see what's the point of jetpack, compared to greasemonkey, pardon my ignorance.

Is it just supposed to become a sort of official greasemonkey?

Re:Good thing. (1)

FreakCERS (517467) | more than 4 years ago | (#31448766)

As I am curious, can a jetpack extension run a background timer independent of any window(as long as the application is running)?

Honestly, I don't know, but I imagine so.

Can a jetpack extension modify chrome elements and behaviours?

Yes. You can read more on the current version here: https://jetpack.mozillalabs.com/sdk/0.1/docs/ [mozillalabs.com] specifically the glossary might be interesting for a quick overview.

Is it just supposed to become a sort of official greasemonkey?

It is supposed to be a much more powerful greasemonkey, with a strong security system.

Changed (4, Informative)

Kohenkatz (1166461) | more than 4 years ago | (#31448022)

Here is what it looks like now: http://gallery.ymkatz.net/mozilla%20jetpack.png [ymkatz.net]

Re:Changed (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31448146)

@ Kohenkatz

Try this: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/4550

Re:Changed (1)

Mr. Vage (1084371) | more than 4 years ago | (#31448706)

What theme are you using? I really like it. I've found a bunch of similar ones, but none of them put the glass effect on the bookmarks toolbar and the tab strip.

I recently did this myself. (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31448056)

I harvested a background out of sheer laziness. I took it from Ford.com! LOL!

Maple Leaf Icon (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31448062)

The story shows up with the maple leaf icon. It's like just another whining of those guys up north playing make-belief country.

UIs need to be borrowed from (1)

Darkness404 (1287218) | more than 4 years ago | (#31448194)

Seriously, there are only a few ways you can make a decent UI that is familiar. Sharing user interfaces is a -good thing- when it comes down to it, the more familiar an application is, the easier it is to use. Imagine if every single program had a radically different UI. You opened up Firefox and it looked nothing like IE, which looked nothing like Opera which looked nothing like Chrome, if this happened probably everyone would still be using Mosaic. The more UIs borrow from one another, the easier they are to use and the better the UI becomes.

Re:UIs need to be borrowed from (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31448442)

I don't disagree with you, on how standardization would probably benefit the greater whole, but someone somewhere was tasked to create this design and it took time. If it was their intention to be released freely for the public, then so be it. Metalabs probably had a handful of full-time employee just tasked with creating and submitting RFP, and it's always a gamble for the company, but the employee is probably happy just doing what he/she is told, whereas the sales people are bummed out.

Your attitude is pretty common to us in the art field (from logo design, typography, photography). It's a fine line we tread, especially the freelancer among us, but that's because we don't earn nearly as close as a single programmer (assuming that's the majority of the demographics in /.) The most we can do is stick to our guns and protect our copyrights, even for something simple as a layout design. Licensing is not that prohibitive, especially for an organization such as Mozilla. After all, how many of the art types do you see cruising around in a $40k car? I'd like to think we price things fairly according to the market.

Re:UIs need to be borrowed from (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31448774)

Imagine if every single program had a radically different UI.

Imagine if Ford patented the H-gate pattern for 3-speed transmissions. Then GM patented the W-gate. And Dodge patented the O-gate. And Mercedes patented the ess-tsett gate. And Renault patented the cedilla-gate.

Shit, no one would ever get out of their driveway.

Hm.. its a mockup (-1, Flamebait)

mysidia (191772) | more than 4 years ago | (#31448214)

MetaLab didn't need to make a big deal about this. they could of reported it to Mozilla if it were concerned. It's obvious MetaLab posted the blog entry to get attention. Basically advertising: even negative attention is good for them. I would wager hardly anyone on Slashdot even knew MetaLab's name prior to this article. Now that this article has hit news, everyone who read it knows they could go to MetaLab to get a quote for UI design....

Obviously this whole incident will do a lot of good for MetaLab, in the way of free advertising, they will probably profit handsomely from this fiasco.

While Mozilla have used their imagery, and there is obvious similarity, they haven't included it in a user interface, they have combined the work with work of their own to express some ideas about how their final interface could look like.

I would think it's unlikely that their final design would look at all like the mockup. First mockup very rarely reflects what the final product will be.

Basically, while, the imagery Mozilla posted that had some renditions including some MetaLab design elements, it was of zero commercial value, used in the creative process.

And although a derivative work, probably fair use, providing they had only used it in the mockup.

Re:Hm.. its a mockup (4, Interesting)

larry bagina (561269) | more than 4 years ago | (#31448288)

They did (privately) report it to Mozilla first. The blog went up after Mozilla ignored them. Mozilla could have handled it privately if they were concerned. It's obvious Mozilla only apologized because they were receiving negative attention, not because they think there was a problem.

Re:Hm.. its a mockup (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31448836)

Mozilla should have told them to piss off. Fuckin' babies crying about nothing.

Re:Hm.. its a mockup (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31449158)

"The blog went up after Mozilla ignored them."

Because large organizations respond instantly to every communication, no matter where you direct your correspondence.

The blog post went up the same day as the mock ups.

Nothing ripped off, taken, stolen, or missing (2)

noidentity (188756) | more than 4 years ago | (#31448246)

I just wanted to note that apparently Mozilla didn't remove anything from MetLab's servers; all data was intact and unharmed. Things were copied, yes, but that didn't prevent MetLab from continuing to use their UI elements, unlike what their accusations make it sound like (last time I had my car stolen, I couldn't drive it until I got it back, but maybe MetLab inhabits a different dimension than me).

Who cares if it was a mockup? (1)

the_raptor (652941) | more than 4 years ago | (#31448272)

What does it matter if it was a mockup or the real thing? Last I checked using "UI elements" was not protected by copyright or patents. This is the same as the Microsoft and Apple "Look-and-feel" lawsuit from last century. The original complaint was about mockups using straight copied images which could be a copyright infraction but the final product even if it looked nearly identical would be non-infringing. KDE and GNOME both have UI themes that completely rip off various versions of Windows and MacOS. The design (and arts in general) community is so deeply incestuous that to complain about this sort of thing just makes you look like a punk. I looked at their "UI elements"I that Google ripped off and it is absolutely nothing special that hasn't been done before. With a color change and slight adjustment there would be no reasonable grounds for claims of infringement.

Re:Who cares if it was a mockup? (1)

h4rr4r (612664) | more than 4 years ago | (#31448438)

KDE4 ripped off 7 before they even saw it then?
Did they use a kTimemachine?

Re:Who cares if it was a mockup? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31448492)

I'm willing to bet if you dig deep enough, there's a lot of cross-licensing or IP trading behind closed doors between lawyers, even for UI. It's just that big companies don't announce such mundane things. For starters, the concept of "closing a window" is patented by IBM.

[google: ibm patent close window]

As for the art community (which I'm part), we stop being incestuous once we feel the pain of starvation and start working as freelancers. We learn to play by the rules because it's the rules that helps us fight off companies (big and small) from abusing and profiting off our work.

reverse the situation (3, Insightful)

timmarhy (659436) | more than 4 years ago | (#31448428)

stop and think of the comments if the situation was reversed.

yes thats right, slashdot is as bad as fox news.

Re:reverse the situation (1)

Reverend Zanix (1157273) | more than 4 years ago | (#31448476)

It would be a non-issue since Firefox is Open Source, right? I'm not expert on Open Source Licensing, but I'd presume that means the GUI art as well.

Re:reverse the situation (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31448678)

Commenters on /. don't claim to be fair and balanced.

fox news (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31448952)

yes thats right, slashdot is as bad as fox news.

I'm pretty sure Slashdot makes no claim toward being a fair and balanced news source with regard to these issues...

Re:reverse the situation (2, Insightful)

onefriedrice (1171917) | more than 4 years ago | (#31448956)

stop and think of the comments if the situation was reversed.

yes thats right, slashdot is as bad as fox news.

More like people are just people. Our experiences give us bias, and there is nobody who can achieve perfect objectivity in every situation. People here have a propensity to cheer for open source software. Through their own experiences, Fox viewers have a different perspective. It's not bad, it's just life. The alternative would be to throw out all emotion and become as the Vulcans. Yes, we're all biased. Yes, we're all emotional. Yes, we're all hypocrites--especially those of us who pretend to have no bias.

Fuck Canada. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31448704)

Fuck Canada.

Front page stuff: decent behaviour (2, Insightful)

Odinlake (1057938) | more than 4 years ago | (#31449010)

X slights Y, apologizes. Y accepts apology. Isn't it a rather depressing thought that this kind of upright behaviour apparently is unusual enough that it makes news?

No wonder Mozilla is falling behind (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31449108)

Look what they try to copy. There aren't much new designs here, or have been on the Web for quite a while now.

Slashvertisement much? (2, Interesting)

Hognoxious (631665) | more than 4 years ago | (#31449122)

I hadn't heard of MetaLab before. Now, I have.

Mission accomplished.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?