-1 to changing the name at this time. I know my vote isn't binding, but I just want a record of it. At the moment, I think any potential causes of conflict, given that there are NO trademark or patent conflicts, are dubious at best.
Cheers, Les On Fri, Jan 2, 2009 at 7:06 PM, Craig L Russell <[email protected]> wrote: > any more... > > ok, former board member. ;-) > > Craig > > On Jan 2, 2009, at 2:41 PM, Henri Yandell wrote: > >> I'm not a board member. :) >> >> On Fri, Jan 2, 2009 at 11:27 AM, Craig L Russell <[email protected]> >> wrote: >>> >>> -1 Do not change JSecurity's name >>> >>> We had the discussion in early December on the legal mailing list and no >>> issues were raised contrary to Henri's comments. Henri is the only board >>> member who commented on the JSecurity name during the discussion. >>> >>> We will have at least three more votes where additional issues regarding >>> the >>> name can be brought up: >>> >>> 1. The first release of JSecurity code from the incubator. >>> 2. The graduation vote of JSecurity taken by the incubator PMC. >>> 3. The acceptance of JSecurity by the Apache board after the incubator >>> votes. >>> >>> Craig >>> >>> >>> Dear JSecurity Team, >>> >>> There has been lengthy debate without consensus as to whether or >>> JSecurity's >>> name should be changed to something else. So, there is need for a vote. >>> >>> Please vote on changing JSecurity's name to something else. This is ONLY >>> a >>> vote of if we should change the name, NOT what any alternate name might >>> be. >>> I'd like to leave this vote open for 7 days instead of the usual 3 to >>> account for time that people may not be able to respond due to the >>> holidays. Of course we can close the vote early if all binding votes are >>> accounted for prior to the 7 day limit. >>> >>> The vote is open for the next 7 days and only votes from the JSecurity >>> development team are binding. >>> >>> [ ] +1 Change JSecurity's name >>> [ ] -1 Do not change JSecurity's name >>> >>> On Dec 2, 2008, at 1:06 PM, Henri Yandell 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. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>> DISCLAIMER: Discussions on this list are informational and educational >>>> only. Statements made on this list are not privileged, do not >>>> constitute legal advice, and do not necessarily reflect the opinions >>>> and policies of the ASF. See <http://www.apache.org/licenses/> for >>>> official ASF policies and documents. >>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] >>>> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] >>>> >>> >>> Craig L Russell >>> Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://db.apache.org/jdo >>> 408 276-5638 mailto:[email protected] >>> P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp! >>> >>> >>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] >>> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] >>> >>> >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] >> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] >> > > Craig L Russell > Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://db.apache.org/jdo > 408 276-5638 mailto:[email protected] > P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp! > >
