[Foundation] voting update

Stephen Lee srlee at sltscommunications.net
Tue Mar 12 05:22:50 CST 2002

Julian Wrote:
Personally, I /don't have anything to say/ on the *trademark* issue.
Currently from what I have heard it is OK for me to call my Open Source
client Gabber: The GNOME Jabber Client. And the commercial projects I
work on can say they're Jabber Powered as long as they comply with the
specification being created in the standards-jig. That's good enough for
me. Maybe no one is saying anything because no one has a problem with it
now? I don't know.

Ok let's be fair, what you have heard or what you know? If you have it
in writing I'd love to see it. I have been following a thread in the
jdev mailing list about ccm (client connection manager), I and several
others are SURE it was in j.o cvs a while back and then disappeared. As
I understand it and I could be wrong, Jabber Inc. pulled it internally
... Err wasn't that Open Source code?? Anyway my point is this , if they
can do that with ccm, what if they decide that they want to be the only
ones to use the name Jabber as well? 

Your right Gabber probably doesn't have much to worry about, but what
about Jabber.org, JabberStudio, Jabber Foundation.... And Jabberd. I am
sure as a foundation member and as a fun loving developer of jabber that
this might raise some issues with you.

I think Jeremie mentioned that the jabber trademark had not reached
review yet, would it not be in the best interests of the foundation to
contest the trademark at that point?

Julian Wrote:
I'm just not sure why this is such a big deal. If you had said something
similar and stpeter or DJ blew up on you I'd come to your defense too.
Umm is that not what Michael did to Barry and is that not what I did for

Forgive this messed up formatting , me email program seems to hate me
this morning.


More information about the Members mailing list