Re: [VOTE] Change JSecurity's Name

Sun, 11 Jan 2009 10:33:12 -0800

Here's my take and I'm not intransigent on this. I'll use a bit of hyperbole to make my point.
If some company who makes hand made woven baskets has had the name JSecurity there would be no problem. If that company decides to market a program that trains people in basket weaving written in java there would be no problem. 


However, other computer security companies have an earlier claim to  
JSecurity.  If they decide the release a suite of java programs that  
performs security analysis then there's overlap.



Why would we want to live in the grey area anyway?  Am I  
misunderstanding something?


Regards,
Alan


On Jan 10, 2009, at 5:05 PM, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:


Agreed.

I don't really understand what problem is being solved here.

geir

On Jan 10, 2009, at 8:00 PM, Les Hazlewood wrote:


-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!





---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]

































					Reply via email to