I'm not sure it does? Would the successor actually need a Jabber license just to exist? It only needs one to put "Jabber" in a product or company name, which being named the XMPP Standards Foundation doesn't do, right? (Wasn't the 2004 rename meant to move us off "Jabber" precisely for this reason?)

The one place it does seem to be applicable: if we decide to keep the licensor role, the handoff likely needs to happen before the US org winds up (if that's winding up at all). If, on the other hand, we let it lapse, is there anything left to hand over?

 - Guus

On Wed, Jun 17, 2026 at 5:57 PM Dave Cridland <dave@cridland.net> wrote:
Small point:

On Wed, 17 Jun 2026 at 15:56, Guus der Kinderen <guus.der.kinderen@gmail.com> wrote:
3. Jabber Trademark Sublicensing Program

The "second foundation" (Asimov fans will enjoy that one) will actually need a trademark licence for Jabber, won't it?
So should it get that sorted before the US XSF winds up the programme?

Dave.