At first glance, I don't see a serious risk of conflict with the
proposed Apache Howl podling and the pre-existing OW2 HOWL project.
First and most importantly, the two software products sound quite
different. I'm presuming this is correct, and that any relevant
consumer using HOWL to review their server's logs wouldn't be confused
by the new release of Howl. If there *is* a conflict with some other
software product that *is* similar in functionality to what Apache Howl
would be, then it would be a problem.
Separately, OW2's HOWL doesn't seem to be actively maintained, meaning
it's less likely anyone would confuse the two software products. Less
importantly is the point that they call it "HOWL", and we would
presumably call our future product "Apache Howl".
Note that this does not mean there aren't potential trademark issues
from the legal perspective. Using many English words as a product name
is likely to be using someone's software trademark somewhere. But in
terms of our risk management, it's most important if the use is for a
similar kind of software, or something that would otherwise lead to
consumer confusion. Plus, a key way we differentiate Apache projects is
by ensuring their primary branding includes the word "Apache". 8-)
If the IPMC or the potential podling have further trademark related
questions, please email the trademarks@ (privately archived) mailing
list for further advice.
Personally, I don't see how "Howl" applies to big data projects, but,
hey, my opinion doesn't matter there, and I do like the sound of it.
And thanks for thinking about the branding up front!
- Shane Curcuru
VP, Brand Management, The Apache Software Foundation
http://www.apache.org/foundation/marks
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
