[Foundation] Jabber (tm)

Max Metral Max.Metral at PEOPLEPCHQ.COM
Fri May 18 14:32:12 CDT 2001


I think the test is whether "sufficient" confusion is caused in the
marketplace...

-----Original Message-----
From: Peter Saint-Andre [mailto:stpeter at jabber.org]
Sent: Friday, May 18, 2001 1:44 PM
To: members at jabber.org
Subject: Re: [Foundation] Jabber (tm)


As always IANAL (thank god!), but my understanding is that the trademark 
is on "Jabber". I don't see how "Jab" is covered under that but I don't 
know how all this stuff works. As an analogy, I'm sure that 
Daimler-Chrysler has trademarked "Mercedes", but does that mean you 
can't (well, at least not without permission) call your specialty car 
repair business "The Merc Shoppe"? Maybe "Jab" is defined as a short 
form of "Jabber" in some way (as "Coke" is derived from "Coca-Cola")? 
Hopefully this will all become clear at some point... ;)

Peter

Stephen Lee wrote:

> After having a couple of telephone conversations with Michael Bauer , I'm
> not sure that is 100% correct, it seemed to me through these conversations
> that Jab or Jabber would be a problem in a commercial client, but I could
be
> wrong. It also appears at this point that they are not absolutely clear as
> to what will qualify and what won't, but are working hard at getting some
> guidelines in place.
> 
> Steve
> myJabber - Lead Developer
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: members-admin at jabber.org [mailto:members-admin at jabber.org]On
> Behalf Of Peter Saint-Andre
> Sent: Friday, May 18, 2001 1:15 PM
> To: members at jabber.org
> Subject: Re: [Foundation] Jabber (tm)
> 
> 
> Hi Maciek,
> 
> Yes, that's how I understand things. "MacJab: Powered by Jabber" (or
> "100% Jabber Compatible" or whatever) is how you could brand and market
> your software.
> 
> Peter
> 
> Maciek Borowka wrote:
> 
> 
>>So, according to that, my hypotetical 100% commercial product
>>can be called MacJab without any problem?
>>
>>And to have a (also hypotetical) "Powered by Jabber" logo,
>>I should ask let the fundation do some compatibility tests?
>>
>>If it is like that, I feel fully satified :+))
>>
>>Cheers,
>>
>>/M at ciek
>>
>>On Fri, 18 May 2001 09:18:52 -0600 Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>Hi Piers,
>>>
>>>My understanding is that Joe Developer would be able name his program
>>>Jabber* (such as Jabbernaut or whatever) as long as it's not a
>>>commercial product. If you had a commercial product, or even if you
>>>didn't, you could still associate your product with Jabber in other
>>>ways, for example as Gabber has done. I'm not sure that such a solution
>>>will please everyone, but it's better than renaming the protocol to
>>>something totally different like IMTP or PIXI or whatever.
>>>
>>>Peter
>>>
>>>Piers Harding wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>Firstly: Losing the name "Jabber" to the protocol would be disastrous -
>>>>
> and for me I
> 
>>>would probably lose interest and walk away from the community if it
>>>
> happened.
> 
>>>>Secondly: I think the greatest worry of producing a product based on
>>>>
> Jabber is making
> 
>>>a clear link/brand association with Jabber, if you cannot use Jabber in
>>>
> the name.  Not
> 
>>>being able to easily make that connection seems to me to be pivotal.
>>>
>>>
>>>>Jer has crystalised the position of jabber.com, and I believe that they
>>>>
> are "trying to
> 
>>>do the right thing", but if we are to take away the ability of Joe
average
>>>
> developer
> 
>>>trying to establish his product through name association, then we have to
>>>
> compensate for
> 
>>>that with another mechanism.  Maybe a jabber commercial portal - an
>>>
> adaption of
> 
>>>jabbercentral.com, that provides a vehicle for product promotion to go
>>>
> with product
> 
>>>certification that has been previously mentioned?  The key would be to
>>>
> make the entry
> 
>>>barrier free, or at least very cheap, and thus accessible to everyone.
>>>
>>>
>>>>On Thu, May 17, 2001 at 03:09:01PM -0500, Jeremie wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>/me chimes in :)
>>>>>
>>>>>On Wed, 16 May 2001, Mathew Johnston wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>First, some history. A company that did some sort of voice software
>>>>>>had a trademark on the word Jabber (or something involving that word).
>>>>>>They threatened Jer with a cease and desist when he started using the
>>>>>>word Jabber to describe his new XML based protocol that would be used
>>>>>>for IM and more. Jer had already used the name a fair bit and the
>>>>>>Jabber protocol that he had started became more popular. He didn't
>>>>>>have money to fight in court with or buy the trademark from the other
>>>>>>company. Jabber.com, however, did. So, they bought the trademark.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>Just to clarify things a bit, the original company was Oquirrh
>>>>>Technologies Inc. from NY.  They had the domain jabber.com and a
>>>>>
> trademark
> 
>>>>>on jabber for "computer software for reducing the number of bits
>>>>>
> required
> 
>>>>>to transmit speech" and some java classes that did such voice
>>>>>
> compression.
> 
>>>>>I never received a cease and desist, and IANAL, but I'm not sure how
>>>>>applicable it would have been given the specific usage of the trademark
>>>>>
> by
> 
>>>>>Oquirrh.  Essentially, Jabber.com came into existence by purchasing the
>>>>>domain and trademark from Oquirrh, and has since then filed their own
>>>>>trademark on jabber for "Software for real-time communications over a
>>>>>global computer network."
>>>>>
>>>>>On Thu, 17 May 2001, Thomas Charron wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>  Jabber.com may not be ABLE to do this.  Rememeber, trademarks have
>>>>>>monatary value.  They are a publically held company.  Start giving
>>>>>>
> stuff
> 
>>>>>>away, and you quickly find yourself in the midst of lawsuites by
>>>>>>shareholders.  'Specially when dealing with smaller companies who are
>>>>>>
> in
> 
>>>>>>tough spots right now..
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>Another clarification, Jabber.com is not a publicly held company, they
>>>>>are private, but largely owned by a public company (WEBB).
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
> 
> 
> 
> --
> Peter Saint-Andre
> stpeter at jabber.org
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Members mailing list
> Members at jabber.org
> http://mailman.jabber.org/listinfo/members
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Members mailing list
> Members at jabber.org
> http://mailman.jabber.org/listinfo/members
> 
> .
> 
> 



-- 
Peter Saint-Andre
stpeter at jabber.org

_______________________________________________
Members mailing list
Members at jabber.org
http://mailman.jabber.org/listinfo/members



More information about the Members mailing list