Canonical and Ubuntu have gotten some backlash from their users prompting a recent update in which they are given the added burden of the Firefox EULA without their consent. The issue at hand is that Mozilla is requiring Canonical to include the EULA for their browser with all new releases if they continue to want to use the Firefox name. It apparently stems from a trademark issue, and doesn't actually restrict the user in any fashion. Of course, that's not why the users are upset - they are upset because it seems unnecessary.
The owner of the company seems to side with the users. He sees the inclusion of the EULA as mostly pointless. He does see why Mozilla is requiring the inclusion of the EULA, but calls the decision "unfortunate."
For anyone else who uses Firefox, we're used to that - you agree to the EULA when you install the browser. At the moment Mozilla is not commenting on why they made this decision. It is worthy of note that Mozilla's interest here is not in protecting the browser itself or the code behind it, but merely their trademark - that is, the Firefox name.