I thought this was brought up on legal-discuss. What was the
consensus there on this?
On Jan 11, 2009, at 7:20 PM, Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
I think there's a lot of foot work that needs to be done to just get
us to find the right person. Find that person and I'll be happy to
start the discussion. I imagine that something might have to be
hand held through the lawyers if we're lucky.
Regards,
Alan
On Jan 11, 2009, at 11:27 AM, Les Hazlewood wrote:
Great idea. But would this be something that one of the folks in
legal@ would want to formulate? Or should it be one of us 'regular
joes' just asking a question? I've cc'd Legal to see what they
recommend....
Cheers,
Les
On Sun, Jan 11, 2009 at 2:19 PM, Tim Veil <[email protected]> wrote:
Its not a bad idea. It could be one of those things that they are
unlikely
to care about unless specifically asked to care, but it would
certainly put
an end to the discussion.
Tim
On Jan 11, 2009, at 2:03 PM, Emmanuel Lécharny wrote:
Tim Veil wrote:
I guess my take is that
JSecurity has been in the name of this project for nearly 4
years without
compliant
JSecurity has name recognition and a following
The project of concern, "J-Security" is not a product at all but
rather a
" resource for security information and analysis."
J-Security's parent company Juniper is in the network hardware
business
not the Java application business
JSecurity is an open-source software project not a "product" we
are
looking to sell (not a competitor in any way to Juniper)
Just a suggestion : why don't someone contact Juniper legals and
ask if
they see JSecurity as an acceptable name for us ? That would
close this long
thread, I think.
--
--
cordialement, regards,
Emmanuel Lécharny
www.iktek.com
directory.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
