[Foundation] Jabber is the protocol

[Peter Saint-Andre]

Max Metral wrote:

> But if the commercial limitation is enforced, isn't that 
> counterproductive to the foundation?  So say PeoplePC wants to use 
> Jabber.  Our product name won't be Jabber, but wouldn't the Foundation 
> WANT us to be able to say powered by Jabber or Jabber compatible or 
> whatever?  And isn't Jabber.com saying we would have to pay for that right?
> 
> How much do we think we're talking about here for the cost of acquiring 
> and "legalizing" the Jabber trademark?


Hi Max,

My understanding is that no one would have to pay *anything* to use a 
derivative mark such as "Jabber Inside" or "Jabber Compliant" or 
whatever. So if PeoplePC offers PeopleIM and says it's "Powered by 
Jabber", then you don't have to pay anything for that privilege (though 
you might have to demonstrate some level of compliance with standards 
defined by the Foundation).

Further, my understanding is that the Foundation will not have to pay 
for the right to develop and manage these derivative marks. Obviously 
it's in Jabber.com's best interests that there exist lots of services 
and products that are "powered by Jabber", so they want to work with the 
Jabber Foundation to make this happen in a way that everyone can use.

Peter

-- 
Peter Saint-Andre
stpeter at jabber.org