[JDEV] Jabber, the Name

[Flora Brunas]

The Apache Foundation is not for profit, but
Jabber(TM).com is.

I propose the following, which can be discussed at the
Jabber(TM) Foundation meeting:

All references to Jabber(TM) must be followed by (TM)
- just kidding!

The Jabber Foundation should control licenses for the
use of "Jabber" in product names, company names,
website URLs, etc.  Having the Foundation control
"Jabber" is better than having Jabber.com control the
name for the same reason the Foundation limits
representation for any single corporation to 15%.  

It doesn't make sense for the Jabber Foundation to
allow no more than 15% membership from any company,
yet allow Jabber.com to own the name of the Jabber
technology 100%.

Let's thank Jabber.com for their money and assistence,
but make them play on the same playing field as other
corporations.  The not-for-profit Jabber Foundation
should control how Jabber is used, similarly to the
Apache Foundation.  Only this way will Jabber truly be
Open and fairly accessable by all.

Flora
CEO, JabberEducation


--- Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter at jabber.org> wrote:
> First, IANAL.
> 
> 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. My understanding is that
> Jabber is trying to 
> steer a course between these two approaches.
> 
> 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. I'm not sure if we (here
> I put on my 
> corporate hat) will license the term to other
> companies for their 
> company names, or just for product names, or how all
> that is working.
> 
> 
> > Is Jabber.com the only commercial company allowed
> to
> > use the word "Jabber" for their company names and
> > products?  This is not fair.
> 
> 
> Not as far as I know. However, Jabber.com owns the
> trademark and so one 
> might have to work something out with them in order
> to use the word 
> Jabber in your product/company name.
> 
>  
> > The name "Jabber" should be similar to "Linux", in
> > that any company can use it in naming products,
> > websites or companies.
> 
> 
> With all due respect, says who? As I mentioned,
> there are different 
> approaches here and I've never heard anyone say that
> Apache was wrong to 
> be more protective of the Apache name than Linus is
> of the Linux name.
> 
> > If Jabber.com can prevent
> > other corporations from using the term "Jabber",
> it
> > will greatly limit the progress of Jabber
> technology.
> 
> 
> Being more careful about name protection than Linux
> does not seem to 
> have hurt the adoption of Apache's technology.
> 
> >>From what I've discovered, "Jabber" was used in
> the
> > public domain long before Webb Interactive came
> along
> > and trademarked the name. 
> 
> 
> Certainly, the word 'jabber' has a long history. Not
> necessarily in the 
> context of instant messaging, though -- which is
> what we're talking 
> about here.
> 
>  
> > Who coined the name Jabber originally?  
> 
> 
> I think Jer (with regard to this project, of
> course).
> 
> 
> > Was it immediately trademarked before being used
> as a
> > public open source project?  
> 
> 
> No. Jabber.com bought the rights from someone else.
> 
> 
> > Did Jabber.com buy the name from someone?
> 
> 
> Yes. I'm not sure who.
> 
> 
> > Did Jabber.org make an exclusive agreement with a
> > single corporation (Jabber.com) to use the name
> > Jabber?
> 
> 
> AFAIK, yes (in essence). I'm not sure of all the
> details.
> 
> 
> > If anyone could explain why Jabber.com has a legal
> > trademark on the name "Jabber", 
> 
> 
> The short answer is: because they paid for it (and
> jabber.org / Jeremie 
> was not in a position to do so -- it ain't cheap).
> 
> > and why they prevent
> > other commercial organizations from using "Jabber"
> in
> 
> > their company or product names, please let me
> know.
> 
> Well, one could say that they saw the potential here
> a long time before 
> anyone else and wish to capitalize on that fact.
> AFAIK, Jabber.com 
> *will* allow others to use the Jabber name but they
> have to pay for the 
> use of the trademark. But I'm not the person to
> answer that definitively.
> 
> Hope this helps.
> 
> Peter
> 
> -- 
> Peter Saint-Andre
> stpeter at jabber.org
> 
> _______________________________________________
> jdev mailing list
> jdev at jabber.org
> http://mailman.jabber.org/listinfo/jdev


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices
http://auctions.yahoo.com/