R: [Foundation] I: [Board] Agenda Discussion
iain.shigeoka at messaginglogic.com
Mon Sep 16 11:33:08 CDT 2002
On 9/14/02 5:23 AM, "Marco Palombi" <marco.palombi at tipic.com> wrote:
> I would like to hear more from the Foundation Members and the Community in
> general about the Jabber Trademark (who should own it in the best interest
> of the Jabber Community as a whole); I would like to know in particular:
> - what is the feeling of Open Source developers ?
As an open source developer, I'd like a minimum of hassles worrying about
how I can use the name "Jabber" and associated logos. I'd like to have a
common, free (zero-cost) resource packet of this information (license,
readme, etc) and collateral data (logo, boilerplate copyright notices,
standard emoticons, etc) that I can read, understand, and then use.
> - what is the feeling of Commercial entities ?
As a commercial developer, I'd like the name "Jabber" and associated logos
to mean something above and beyond just warm fuzzies that we all like each
other. To me this implies some compliance guarantees (automated tests,
testing lab, etc) and more rigorous documentation on what the standards are
to comply with. I'd like a resource packet of information (license, readme,
etc), collateral data (logo, boilerplate copyright notices, standard
emoticons, etc), and information on the limits of modifying, extending, and
otherwise creating "value-add" without violating any agreements that are in
As far as ownership, to me it doesn't matter who owns everything so long as
we can work out a reasonable policy regarding usage of name, copyright,
trademarks, etc. I think its preferable that one entity own all related
assets so that you only have to deal with one organization and there is a
unified response to queries. I also think it is preferable that this
organization have the resources to maintain full-time staff, phones,
contract lawyers, etc. If the JSF can't do this, then the only reasonable
choice would seem to me to be jinc. If there are enough commercial entities
that want to share the responsibility, then it seems logical that they
jointly fund JSF so that it can act as such.
Probably not the majority opinion but that's my thoughts.
More information about the Members