Subject | Re: Mozilla project use of Firebird name |
---|---|
Author | brendaneich |
Post date | 2003-04-18T20:21:15Z |
--- In Firebird-general@yahoogroups.com, Paul Reeves <paul@f...>
wrote:
called "Phoenix FirstView Connect"? We sure didn't.
Just because Phoenix is a common name doesn't mean it can't be used.
Turn what you wrote above around: did you sleep-walk into using
Firebird in spite of other uses of that name for softare? I've heard
objections such as "google wasn't around then" or "Taiwanese software
doesn't matter." Those are lame excuses.
software things. If you owned it, you'd have been able to trademark
it in all those markets.
Again, I'm sympathetic to the claim that we're diluting open source
"brand" naming, in a way that will limit us (not in a way that will
confuse people -- I don't buy that).
/be
wrote:
> brendaneich wrote:s/Phoenix/Firebird/
>
> > Why didn't you guys do something different from
> > when you renamed, then?happened.
>
> Let's get one thing clear - the s/Phoenix/Firebird/ bit never
> We knew we would have to eventually change the name if we called theexpertise
> database Phoenix so we went straight to the Anglicization of it.
>
> For a project such as Mozilla, with all the access you have to
> from AOL, it surprises me greatly that you sleep-walked into thisin the
> first place. Why on earth did you choose the name Phoenix for ait
> sub-project? It certainly raised my eye-brows when I first heard of
> last year.Why? Did you know of a Phoenix BIOS company that makes a browser
called "Phoenix FirstView Connect"? We sure didn't.
Just because Phoenix is a common name doesn't mean it can't be used.
Turn what you wrote above around: did you sleep-walk into using
Firebird in spite of other uses of that name for softare? I've heard
objections such as "google wasn't around then" or "Taiwanese software
doesn't matter." Those are lame excuses.
>Way
> >
> > The uproar here is out of proportion to the facts in evidence.
> > out.We
>
> That may be how you see it. The Firebird people see it differently.
> see an important component of the Mozilla project using the FirebirdNo one owns the name outright, for all things, or even for all
> name as though it already owned it outright.
software things. If you owned it, you'd have been able to trademark
it in all those markets.
Again, I'm sympathetic to the claim that we're diluting open source
"brand" naming, in a way that will limit us (not in a way that will
confuse people -- I don't buy that).
>done
>
> > It would help if both sides expressed some understanding. I've
> > so, belatedly and with an apology.Thank you. I've enjoyed your recent posts in this forum, btw.
>
> Your apology is accepted. And compared to the arrogance displayed by
> that well-known Mozilla advocate Asa Dotzler it is quite refreshing.
/be