[JDEV] Jabber, the Name

[Sean McGlynn]

On Monday 14 May 2001 10:38 pm, you wrote:
> First, IANAL.
>

Ditto...

> There are several approaches to protecting names. Linus Torvalds is, as
> you mention, extremely free with regard to who can use the name Linux.
> On the other hand, the Apache Foundation is decidedly less free with the
> name Apache, and you don't see any companies calling themselves "Apache
> Consulting" or whatever. 

AFAIK, the Apache Foundation doesn't actually have a trademark on the word 
"Apache" though (and I doubt if they could!). However, the apache server is 
an implementation of a standardised protocol with an entirely different name, 
so the comparison with the Jabber trademark question is slightly different.

> My understanding is that Jabber is trying to steer a course between these 
> two approaches.

And here IMHO lies the problem. Which Jabber do you mean? Jabber.com, 
Jabber.org, Jabber the Foundation, Jabber the Protocol, Jabber the open 
source server, Jabber Commercial Server from Jabber.com?
I was under the impression that to protect a trademark, the owner had to 
enforce their "rights" whenever they see it being used without granting them 
recognition with the old "TM". If they don't do so then the Trademark 
invalidates itself through common usage. The Jabber (TM ;-) community uses 
the word for practically everything. This means, IMHO, that Jabber.com have 
either given up their right to the trademark already or will have to start 
enforcing it pretty soon. If the former is true, then we no longer have to 
worry. If the latter is true, then I can see problems with the open source 
community continuing to use the "J" word, which obviously wouldn't be in the 
best interests of anyone.

> As you point out, Jabber.com holds (and paid good money for holding) the
> trademarks in the name Jabber. I do not speak for Jabber.com, although I
> do happen to work for them. AFAIK, Jabber.com has been protective of the
> name Jabber within company names, as since letting *anybody* call
> themselves "Jabber Consulting" or whatever could potentially dilute the
> meaning of the word Jabber.

You mean dilute it further than it already has been ;-)

Cheers,
Sean

-- 
Sean McGlynn
sean at tmiau.com