[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
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?
Jabber: darco at deepdarc.com
eMail: darco at deepdarc.com
More information about the Standards