Friendly XMPP Branding (Re: [Standards] XMPP vs. Jabber)
mwild1+jig at gmail.com
Tue Mar 13 13:53:23 UTC 2007
Am I missing something...? What's wrong with Jabber??
Yes, I am aware it is trademarked, but I thought there was agreement between
the J... er... XSF and Jabber Inc. about the use of the trademark?
Is a name change really worth it, considering 'Jabber' is just getting known
by the average user, and already known by enough to make a change confusing?
A name change would throw all that away, and put us back where we started.
I don't know why this conversation is happening. If it really is impossible
to keep the name Jabber, tell me... why?
On 3/13/07, Matthias Wimmer <m at tthias.eu> wrote:
> Justin Karneges schrieb:
> > The presence of "xim" domains is not surprising, since it is such a
> > word. What is surprising is that it isn't being used very well (xim.orgis
> > Canada drugs? xim.com falls just shy of a domain-squatting
> portal?). With
> > all these different companies in the 'xim' space, I don't think we'd
> have any
> > problem using the name as long as no one has it trademarked for IM.
> XIM seems to be already used as the name of a protocol.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Standards