On Jan 11, 2009, at 3:17 PM, Ralph Goers wrote:
On Jan 11, 2009, at 2:53 PM, Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
On Jan 11, 2009, at 10:52 AM, Tim Veil wrote:
I guess my take is that
JSecurity has been in the name of this project for nearly 4 years
without compliant
Sorry, I'm not following. Unless Juniper has held the name for
three years or less, how is that relevant?
JSecurity has name recognition and a following
Sorry, I don't understand if this is pertinent other than it being
motivation for keeping the name. I also am motivated to keep the
name but I don't see how we can get past the issues below.
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)
It doesn't matter if we sell a product or not. It's a name
collision, albeit a potential collision. If they chose to push out
a product under that name we would be in trouble; if I am wrong
here someone please tell me.
Now, if you told me that we held our name longer than Juniper held
theirs then it would be a different story.
So to put it more succinctly, here are the criteria where I am
happy to change my vote. Any single one would work for me.
1) We held the name longer than Juniper - I'll take anyone's word
on this
2) If Juniper came out with a product under their service offering
we would have nothing to worry about - I will only take an informed
opinion
I'm guessing that the others would change their vote as well.
Has anyone from Juniper contacted Apache about a problem? Based on
the research that has been done I don't see this as an obvious
infringement. If the project has been around for 4 years without
complaint I don't think it is worth the time and effort to worry
about things Juniper may or may not choose to do in the future. If
their claim is on J-Security one could argue that that is not the
same as JSecurity anyway.
Ok, so here's the analogy that I gave earlier. Let's say that 4 years
ago a bunch of buddies and I in North Dakota started a project called
Google. It's pretty popular and people in South Dakota even start
using it. We have been out in the wild for 4 years. At no time
during this period has Google Inc. in Mountain View, CA, been
concerned about name collision enough to contact anyone on the
project. Does this suggest that they are unlikely to do so in the
future when developers in CA start using it? Not likely.
So my position is that just because no one has complained doesn't mean
that we're free and clear.
As for J-Security versus JSecurity do you think that Google would mind
if we had a project called G-oogle?
What if I had the strongly held opinion that it's not likely that
Google would care? Is that good enough for ASF to allow a java
project called G-oogle?
Regards,
Alan
