[Foundation] Jabber (tm)
colin at vedalabs.com
Mon May 21 11:34:31 CDT 2001
I didn't get much response the last time I mentioned this, so maybe I'm way
off. Please tell me if I'm wrong.
"Jabber" == Name of protocol && Name of Whole Idea we're talking about
"Jabber" == Trademark OWNED by Jabber.com
If I am correct, am I the only one who sees this as a problem? It's quite
possible I'm overreacting. Can I get some feedback?
On to Mr. Bauers items...
> 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
Hmmm.. "using the Jabber name appropriately"... that means NOT in any
company name, domain name, or product name. I'm just having trouble being
ok with this, but Jabber.com has full _legal_ right to do this. (see top of
email) I guess I wish the community owned "Jabber" and Jabber.com made
their own name for quality high-end products by branding it with
"Jabber.com". I think if (and I'm sure they do) have top-notch products,
they don't need to control the word "Jabber" and they can stand on their own
by putting "Jabber.com" on their products.
> 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 :)
This would be perfectly fine with me if the community hadn't already adopted
the name "Jabber" as the protocol name and this great idea that we all know
as "Jabber". (again, see top of email)
> 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.
It would be GREAT if Jabber.com would allow others to use "Jab" in the name
so others could at least somehow easily ally their products/services/etc
with "Jabber" (I mean the idea and protocol here, not the company
jabber.com). As for the name "Jabber", see the rest of my comments :)
> I think that covers it.
I don't agree that the points made address the problem I stated at the
beginning of this email. Again, maybe I'm crazy and it's not an issue.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Members