[Foundation] Jabber Name - Free Speech Issue

Siegel, Aviv ASiegel at athoc.com
Thu May 17 12:07:43 CDT 2001

I beg to differ about the "second type", as described by Tomas: "Closed
systems should be
forced not to use Jabber in any way."

It is the foundation and community objective to promote the use of "Jabber,
the protocol", thus, every use of the protocol - for "closed" systems as
well as for "open" systems - will benefit the community. On the contrary,
working in commercial class systems will help the protocol and other uses of
it (not just plain IM, but rather for JAM) to mature.

I think that "Powered by Jabber" should not be restricted in this sense, but
rather be encouraged by the community.

Jabber in product and company names is something completely different. I was
not aware until recently about the "history" of the name and trademark. Now,
knowing more, I do not think that j.c should give away the name. I do
believe that there are some cases, specifically projects and products which
are open, free and for the community benefit that should be allowed to use
the name; this issue should be regulated by j.c with j.f.

Thanks, Aviv.

-----Original Message-----
From: Tomas Mrkvicka [mailto:tmrkvicka at softnov.cz]
Sent: Thu, May 17, 2001 12:38 AM
To: 'members at jabber.org'
Subject: RE: [Foundation] Jabber Name - Free Speech Issue

This porn phobia is a pure nonsense. Porn is a moving power of
technology (eg. VCR, satelite TV, e-commerce...) and there is no need
(and makes no sense to try) to "prevent" use Jabber for porn activities.
I even think it could help in adaptation of the technology. People are
inteligent enough to find out that e-mail can be used for spamming and
working as well, web can deliver both porn and news etc.
My view on Jabber trademark problem follows:
Jabber is a trademark of Jabber.com. Its their investment and we
shouldnt to force them to give out their property (yes, I'm from
post-communistic country so I'm VERY sensitive on forcing someone to
giving his property for free in the name of "public interests").
Jabber.com should have an exclusive right to use Jabber as a trademark
for theirs products.  Other products (both commercial and
non-commercial) shouldn't use a word "Jabber" as a name (or part of
name). That doesn't mean that everyone shouldn't have a right to use
Jabber name for websites, informational pages (Jabberview,
Jabbercentral) serving to community. This use should be granted by
Different story is a "powered by Jabber" label. There is basicaly two
different kinds of jabber products:
1) "open" clients or client/server solutions using Jabber infrastructure
2) "closed" client/server solutions using only Jabber specifications and
architecture but not designed to communicate with other Jabber
clients/servers (see www.effata.net for example)
We should carefuly distinguish these two. First are asset to jabber
comunity (even if products are commercial) because following an idea of
open and universal comunication system. Second are something like
parasites (take it technically not negatively). In my view Jabber.com
should "reward" first kind of products with a right to use a "powered by
Jabber" or "based on Jabber technology" or "part of Jabber network"
label even in the product name or subtitle (BlahJab - Jabber technology
IM system) - even in case of porn IM system. Closed systems should be
forced not to use Jabber in any way.

Your opinions?

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mark Zamoyta [mailto:mark at zamoytatech.com]
> Sent: Thursday, May 17, 2001 4:13 AM
> To: members at jabber.org
> Subject: [Foundation] Jabber Name - Free Speech Issue
> Another interesting twist to keep in mind while we hash out 
> this Jabber
> brand issue...  What if someone creates a "Jabber Porn" 
> client that sends
> XXX pictures via Jabber servers, and it gets really popular?  
> Even if the
> product is called "JabPorn - Powered by Jabber!" - this could 
> damage j.c.'s
> brand name and reputation.
> Are there going to be guidelines in place to prevent this?   
> Can Porno be
> Jabber Powered?  Can the lightbulb be drawn alittle raunchier ?!
> Would Jabber.Com prevent free speech / expression over this 
> supposedly open,
> internet standard protocol?
> Mark
> _______________________________________________
> Members mailing list
> Members at jabber.org
> http://mailman.jabber.org/listinfo/members
Members mailing list
Members at jabber.org

More information about the Members mailing list