[Standards-JIG] Public Federated Jabber Network

Robert B Quattlebaum, Jr. darco at deepdarc.com
Thu May 18 23:07:25 UTC 2006


On May 18, 2006, at 2:41 PM, Chris Mullins wrote:

> The problem arises from the fact that there is a corporate entity  
> called Jabber, a protocol often called Jabber, and a foundation  
> called Jabber (and, as you propose, a Federated Network called  
> Jabber).

Actually, all I'm proposing is that when people say "Jabber" but are  
really referring to the federated network of servers which  
communicate using the XMPP protocol, that they can call it PFJN and  
be more clear. I'm actually trying to have less things coupled to the  
single word "Jabber", not more. PFXN is also a viable alternative.

> There are also a number of software projects called Jabber. All of  
> these are effected by the trademarked that is owned by Jabber, Inc.  
> All of these entities exist, to a very, very real degree, at the  
> whim of the trademark holder. This trademark was supposed to be  
> transferred to the JSF some time ago, but that never happended, and  
> the expected outcry never happended.

I could really use some clarification on this issue, because from the  
JSF website it appears that the JSF is involved with determining how  
the Jabber trademark is used, not Jabber Inc. Is there any formal  
agreement between Jabber Inc. and the JSF regarding the trademark?

What exactly is the relationship between Jabber Inc. and the JSF anyway?



__________________
Robert Quattlebaum
Mobile: +1(650)223-4974
Jabber: darco at deepdarc.com
eMail:  darco at deepdarc.com
www:    http://www.deepdarc.com/




More information about the Standards mailing list