Dear Friends, Although Jsecurity is the best name, but in the case of changing the name it's not worthless to have look at: http://www.bchealth.com/services/birthcenter/nativeambabynames.shtml I found "Jacy" among native American names it means "the moon". does anybody has idea about it?
On Tue, Dec 2, 2008 at 4:06 PM, Henri Yandell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Given that it's a name you've been using for 4 years, and it's very > generic [jXxx being a common pattern in our space and Security being > very generic]; I'm inclined to keep the current name; though by the > same reasoning, it's a weak name as "Apache JSecurity" isn't very good > branding. > > My tuppence of opinion. > > Hen > > On Mon, Dec 1, 2008 at 7:55 PM, Les Hazlewood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Hi ASF legal team, >> >> I'm writing this email in hopes of getting your feedback concerning a >> discussion we've been having on the JSecurity email list (an Incubator >> project). >> >> A few of our mentors have expressed concern that there might be a >> possible naming conflict with our project name (JSecurity) and some >> other references found through google and other search mechanisms. >> >> I'd like to point out that the JSecurity name, as an open source >> project identity has been around for almost 4 years now, with zero >> contact from any external entity claiming conflict with a proprietary >> name or product. I know this isn't legal criteria for determining if >> there is a name conflict, but I surface it only to put some context of >> why the original JSecurity developers (and our well-established >> communities) think we should keep the JSecurity name. There might be >> older references to this name, unrelated to our project, but we don't >> know for certain if they would constitute a risk in the name overlap. >> >> We'd like some feedback as to if the project name should be changed or not. >> >> Here is what one of our mentors summarized after doing some research: >> >> <snip> >> Now, looking a bit forward on google, here are some other references >> to JSecurity : >> >> http://jwicglobal.com/Knowledge.htm <http://jwicglobal.com/Knowledge.htm> >> "WIC GLOBAL has developed a comprehensive Information Security >> Assessment service called JSecurity. Our JSecurity experts will >> conduct a full information security risk assessment focusing on:" >> >> http://www.juniper.net/security/ <http://www.juniper.net/security/> >> Seems like they have a service called J-Security. Be sure that >> Juniper has a legal service who might perfectly well send some nicely >> written "cease and desist" letter to the ASF about this name. Not sure >> that our legals want to deal with that ... >> >> http://www.jegers.com/dnn/Products/JPortfolio/tabid/83/Default.aspx >> <http://www.jegers.com/dnn/Products/JPortfolio/tabid/83/Default.aspx> >> Another JSecurity... Seems to be around since 2/11/2005 (at least) >> >> http://www.powerlogic.com.br/powerportal/ecp/files.do?evento=download&urlArqPlc=fld_jc_produc_ing_web2.pdf >> <http://www.powerlogic.com.br/powerportal/ecp/files.do?evento=download&urlArqPlc=fld_jc_produc_ing_web2.pdf> >> This company has a product named JSecurity. Since when ? >> >> As much as I like the JSecurity name, I also think that we are un >> potential jeopardy if we don't change its name. That's the main issue >> we have : we can't afford any kind of legal action when we already >> know that there are company out there which already use this name. >> >> Anyway, I can be wrong, I'm just trying to gather as much information >> as possible. When you guys think you have set your mind about this >> name, you will have to go to [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> with the selected name (be it JSecurity or >> any other) to double check that it's ok or not (IFAIK). That is one of >> the condition to exit from the incubator : >> "Check of project name for trademark issues " >> (http://incubator.apache.org/incubation/Incubation_Policy.html#Minimum+Graduation+Requirements >> <http://incubator.apache.org/incubation/Incubation_Policy.html#Minimum+Graduation+Requirements>). >> >> </snip> >> >> Thanks for your review and feedback! >> >> Best, >> >> Les >> >> On Mon, Dec 1, 2008 at 10:18 PM, Les Hazlewood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> Adam, >>> >>> Thanks _very_ much for such a detailed and thoughtful opinion. I love >>> to see people who aren't necessarily code contributors contribute to >>> the project in other ways. This is very valuable to us. >>> >>> I am in total agreement with your sentiments thus far. It is my >>> opinion that the name we have is great as it is and I'd only like to >>> change the name if someone from legal puts pressure on us to do so. >>> IANAL, so I'd have to trust their judgment. I'm going to post this to >>> legal in just a few minutes asking their feedback. I'd like to hear >>> what they say regardless of what we end up doing - I'm genuinely >>> curious :) >>> >>> Thanks again very much for chiming in. Its nice to see that you (and >>> others) are taking continued interest in the project. >>> >>> Best regards, >>> >>> Les >>> >>> On Mon, Dec 1, 2008 at 6:28 PM, adamtaft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>>> >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> I'm not really a contributor to the JSecurity project yet (though I hope to >>>> be in the future). However, this thread has caught my attention, and so I >>>> thought I'd give a couple of thoughts. >>>> >>>> I have an interest, call it a hobby, in name related issues for software >>>> projects, open source included. So, though I don't speak from any official >>>> background (I guess beyond a little professional), I would like to point >>>> out >>>> a few things about the name Alcatraz. >>>> >>>> First, as I believe has been mentioned, the term Alcatraz has been >>>> associated with other software products already. So, this is bad news with >>>> regards to trademark related issues. Just because its a geographic >>>> location >>>> doesn't mean that it can't be trademarked. Thus, likely these other >>>> software products are going to have problems with any related use of the >>>> term Alcatraz. >>>> >>>> Second, the connotation for JSecurity implies that the product is used to >>>> keep people out of the protected system. This is what the term "security" >>>> implies, right? Alcatraz is a prison. It was NOT meant to keep people >>>> out, >>>> it was meant to keep people in. The use is only quasi-related, and even >>>> confusing, for a product with your feature set. Alcatraz software would be >>>> a better name for a product which keeps workstation/network users >>>> constrained in their internet use, like a firewall, or a web proxy, for >>>> example. Or a child internet monitoring product. >>>> >>>> Don't underestimate the importance of this point. The name of a software >>>> should ideally be somewhat self describing, especially when starting out. >>>> Until the name becomes a core brand, having a self describing name can make >>>> a big difference. >>>> >>>> Third, I don't think you can underestimate how important it is that people >>>> can search the name of your product and find it through Google (and >>>> friends). Clearly the term Alcatraz has a huge number of unrelated hits, >>>> and you would clearly be lost any search engine placement with the name. >>>> Much better to have a name for your software that is the only known >>>> reference so that people can easily find you after having hear the name. >>>> This is why so many companies go crazy and conjure completely strange and >>>> nonsensical product names. >>>> >>>> Fourth, Alcatraz is a relatively difficult name to spell, which again >>>> becomes problematic for the above search recognition reasons. Alkitraz? >>>> Some people simply won't know how to spell it immediately (though this is a >>>> minor point, admittedly). >>>> >>>> Fifth, it seems like you're making preparations for something that you >>>> don't >>>> even know to be a problem. Yes, the Apache legal team should be consulted. >>>> However, it seems like jumping the gun to just start changing package names >>>> with anticipation of a name change. You would be crazy to start renaming >>>> packages based on some unknown possibility that it has to happen in the >>>> future. What value does this add to the software? >>>> >>>> Following the sigma-six and/or extreme programming world view, you >>>> shouldn't >>>> be making any change to your software until the change is actually required >>>> and value is added. Do you have a pending lawsuit? Has the Apache council >>>> suggested the change? Are you being blocked by the incubation process? >>>> Why >>>> even consider a change until it needs to be done. Energy could be better >>>> spent on other matters. >>>> >>>> Yes, it's a trivial thing to refactor a project from Eclipse. But, that's >>>> only a very small part of the bigger issue. Disruption, confusion, >>>> support, >>>> search engine optimization, etc. are what needs to be thought about when >>>> changing the name. >>>> >>>> Further, what if you decide to change the name to Alcatraz, and then get >>>> pressure from another software group? Ouch, time to rename the project yet >>>> again. >>>> >>>> I think you all are better just letting this thing ride until something >>>> real >>>> convicting suggests you need a change. JSecurity is a great product name >>>> which you should stick with until otherwise needed. And, if that day >>>> comes, >>>> Alcatraz is just simply the wrong name, in my humble opinion, for all the >>>> reasons mentioned above. >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> >>>> Adam >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Emmanuel Lecharny wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Alan D. Cabrera wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> On Nov 30, 2008, at 2:32 PM, Emmanuel Lecharny wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Alan D. Cabrera wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Nov 26, 2008, at 9:51 AM, Les Hazlewood wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 6:01 PM, Emmanuel Lecharny >>>>>>>>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Post to [EMAIL PROTECTED], ask them, but give them the names we >>>>>>>>>> have googled >>>>>>>>>> too. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I think this needs to be vetted, so I'm happy to post to >>>>>>>>> legal-discuss. But, I can't easily find the thread with the googled >>>>>>>>> names. Could you please forward them on so I can post them to the >>>>>>>>> legal team? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Let me suggest this. It seems to me that that alcatraz is the clear >>>>>>>> favorite, after jsecurity. Let's start setting up the 1.0 packages >>>>>>>> to be alcatraz and when/if we get the go-ahead from legal and the >>>>>>>> Incubator PMC we can change the packages to be jsecurity. >>>>>>> Well, I think then it's better to stick with JSecurity (because it's >>>>>>> already the name we use), ask to Legal, and move to alcatraz if >>>>>>> needed (or any other name). >>>>>>> >>>>>>> So the first step, IMHO, is to ask Legal about the Jsecurity name >>>>>>> (with all the infos we have already found about it), and also ask >>>>>>> them in the same mail if Alcatraz is ok or not (same here : add some >>>>>>> more infos related to this name, assuming that being a geographical >>>>>>> location, it should not be such a problem). >>>>>> >>>>>> Legal is not a clearing house for project names. They can only give >>>>>> advice if there's a potential conflict, i.e. JSecurity. So far as I >>>>>> can tell, there is none for alcatraz. >>>>>> >>>>>> What I'm worried about is that the vetting effort for the JSecurity >>>>>> name will have the same track record as the v0.9 release. If we start >>>>>> with alcatraz then we have one less thing impeding our incubation >>>>>> process. >>>>> Let's start with Alcratraz then, and we have quit some time to do some >>>>> vetting before 1.0 (hopefully when the project exits from incubator). >>>>> >>>>> So my +1 for alcatraz and +1 for doing the renaming now. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> -- >>>>> cordialement, regards, >>>>> Emmanuel Lécharny >>>>> www.iktek.com >>>>> directory.apache.org >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> View this message in context: >>>> http://n2.nabble.com/JSecurity%27s-new-name-tp1569003p1601248.html >>>> Sent from the JSecurity Developer mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >>>> >>>> >>> >> >
