[Foundation] Jabber is the protocol
Max.Metral at PEOPLEPCHQ.COM
Thu May 17 15:18:45 CDT 2001
I think it's great that this seems to be the case, although one
question/clarification... If Jabber.com is doing this out of their own
goodwill, this would obviously be dangerous for us.
Something buried in my message was the fact that I think we SHOULD consider
repaying them for what they did, even paying a premium on it if necessary.
From: Peter Saint-Andre [mailto:stpeter at jabber.org]
Sent: Thursday, May 17, 2001 4:05 PM
To: members at jabber.org
Subject: Re: [Foundation] Jabber is the protocol
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
> How much do we think we're talking about here for the cost of acquiring
> and "legalizing" the Jabber trademark?
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.
stpeter at jabber.org
Members mailing list
Members at jabber.org
More information about the Members