[Foundation] Jabber (tm)

Colin Madere colin at vedalabs.com
Mon May 21 18:00:13 CDT 2001


To clarify, I do believe that j.c HAS and WILL contribute a lot of resources
to the "Jabber community".  This could possibly work out just fine for
everyone, but I would feel better if it didn't have such a huge potential to
NOT do that just because of a name.

I believe that my company will be completely unaffected by these decisions
we're talking about, my concerns have all been expressed from a "good for
the community" and philisophical viewpoint.  Like you, I will mostly have to
"wait and see", but will try to express concerns where I think they are
warrented.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Iain Shigeoka [mailto:iainshigeoka at yahoo.com]
> Sent: Monday, May 21, 2001 10:12 AM
> To: members at jabber.org
> Subject: RE: [Foundation] Jabber (tm)
> 
> 
> At 11:34 AM 5/21/2001 -0500, you wrote:
> 
> >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?
> 
> I will also agree that it is a bit disturbing.  I don't mind 
> it if the name 
> is owned by a standards organization such ANSI, W3C, etc but 
> this setup is 
> a bit unsettling.  I am practical though.  If j.c is 
> committed to this 
> route (it seems they are) then I see two ways it will fall 
> out (my personal 
> opinion):
> 
> 1) j.c makes it worth our time/effort to deal with this hassle.  For 
> example, they pour a lot of resources into improving the protocols, 
> enforcing them (compatibility tests), educating people about them, 
> marketing jabber, providing documentation, etc.  If so, it 
> will be worth it 
> to deal with these restrictions, use a "Jabber compatibility" 
> mark and make 
> sure not to infringe the jabber tm.  I would consider Sun's 
> handling of 
> Java to fall into this category.  It's a pain to deal 
> properly with Java tm 
> issues.  However, Sun has made it well worth the effort of 
> doing this as 
> the documentation, developer support, improvements, 
> marketing, etc etc is 
> excellent.
> 
> 2) j.c provide very little "value add".  The Jabber name is 
> cool but its 
> not that cool.  And the protocols can be rewritten.  So, if 
> the whole thing 
> turns out to just be a pain or a philosophical problem, I 
> think people will 
> create another version of jabber that's not-jabber.  I have 
> already seen 
> some people on the lists that don't like the current turn of 
> events from a 
> philosophical/ethics standpoint and have already left (or at 
> least said 
> farewell).  I imagine you'll get the same from other people 
> as the issue is 
> worked out and as we see the policy put into effect (for 
> example, I see the 
> first time j.c actually trying to enforce this in court 
> causing a whole 
> crowd to pack up and leave).
> 
> I believe it will be j.c's challenge to accomplish option #1. 
>  Doing it 
> strongly enough will result in a satisfied user community. 
> Those that are 
> philosophically opposed will create free clones rather than 
> completely 
> forking off different versions.  Unfortunately for j.c, 
> they're small so I 
> think it is questionable if they can deliver fast enough for the 
> community's satisfaction while still also addressing their 
> own business 
> concerns.  I'm taking a "wait and see" approach.  What's your 
> opinion on this?
> 
> -iain
> 
> 
> _________________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Members mailing list
> Members at jabber.org
> http://mailman.jabber.org/listinfo/members
> 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://jabber.org/pipermail/members/attachments/20010521/76bc0744/attachment.html


More information about the Members mailing list