[Foundation] Jabber (tm)

Michael Bauer bauer at jabber.com
Fri May 18 18:41:33 CDT 2001

Jer has made a good suggestion concerning the transfer of ownership and this
is receiving some significant attention.  As you can imagine, this requires
the attention of a number of people in a company so I don't have any
definitive answer yet.  Suffice it to say we are investigating a number of
ways to address the concerns of everyone involved, from transferring
ownership to developing an irrevocable perpetual license.  It's going to
take a little time to figure this out.  So please, bear with us.  

What I'd like to do in the meantime is to separate the ownership issue from
the other issues.  If we can at least agree on something then we're getting
somewhere!  Here are a number of points I'd like to build consensus or
discussion around.  

1.  At a minimum we agree we must do something insure the quality of "things
Jabber".  We need to establish some kind of quality management program,
probably based around compliance with the Jabber protocol.  A third party,
the Foundation, should manage this program.  Compliance with this program
confers the right to use some kind of quality mark, such as "100% Jabber".

2.  In addition, we need some mechanism to insure that the community,
through the Foundation, is granted a "perpetual and irrevocable right" to
implement a quality program and bestow a quality mark.  This right insures
that the Community will never lose its investment in using the Jabber name

3.  We agree that non-commercial use of the Jabber name is OK provided that
the use meets the quality standards of the Foundation and uses the quality
mark appropriately.  On a forward-looking basis it would be preferable to
Jabber.com if new non-commercial sites just used the quality mark :)

4.  Regardless of ownership, though, we understand the name Jabber when used
in a commercial product, service, company, or domain is restricted to
Jabber.com, Inc.  We think that it's OK to use something like "Jab" as part
of a name but are just double-checking that right now.  We do think that
something like "Jab"  can only be used in conjunction with the quality mark.

I think that covers it.  So, if you could give me some feedback on those
major points, that would be great.  We'd like to gain some consensus around
these issues independently of the ownership issue (I'd like to make SOME
progress this week :)  Remember, nothing has been decided yet.  We're still
trying to explore and discuss how to best do this.  Let's talk.

More information about the Members mailing list