Re: This problem of mine
What I don't get is why would anyone want to keep the name if there are potential overlaps or troubles ahead? My thoughts exactly. I mean, there are probably better (coding) and harder (releasing, graduating) things to do than getting stuck about the name. Why don't you (as a podling) simply move on with another cool name, for example, just brainstorming here... JSecurity... or something similar? +1
Re: This problem of mine
El mié, 13-05-2009 a las 00:33 +0200, Emmanuel Lecharny escribió: Bernd Fondermann wrote: JSecurity was deemed as a potential naming conflict risk (much in the same way Ki is now), so we dropped it, and finally came to a vote to change the name to Ki. But this resolution took over 4 or 5 months to finally come to a favorable vote, so we didn't want to go through that painful process all over again, since it seemed like no one was willing to come to consensus on other names. It is very difficult to find an even remotely-correlated name in the security space that might not infringe on another site/company/product/trademark/patent. ok, I see. At least, for JSecurity, these conflicts never came up, did they? http://www.juniper.net/security/ That's why so many project go with names from biona or mythology. Given the difficulty and the enormous amount of time spent already, we just wanted to move on to focus exactly on the things you mention, and only worry about changing the name yet again if it was absolutely required by the Incubator to do so. That being said, if the Incubator says the Ki podling must change its name, then fine, we'll be happy to do so, but most of us didn't want to spend the effort worrying about it unless necessary. To me, it seems neccessary, but this is just my 2 eurocent. It took 4 months to move from JSecurity to Ki, just because, very like this thread, people are *discussing* for ever something which would be immediately solved if common sense was applied : avoid as much as possible any risk, and change the name if the risk is becoming a reality. This is the answer you will most likely get from legal. Lawyers know that their business is about managing risk, and risking a conflict with a new name is typically not worth it. It is different when the name has been in use before and has built up some brand power. The ASF is typically not about deciding for the projects/podlings, but about letting them decide. If something so small (though with biksheding potential) is dragging the community, I'd see it more as a symptom of another, hidden conflict, than as a real problem. That said, and if a vote on this issue would come to the PRC I would vote against having a *new* name that has a conflict, versus a well known one in the same situation. And I bet the lawyers would do the same. It will take another 4 months to decide to switch from Ki to something more appropriate if we follow the same pattern. That's a waste of time and energy. Don't follow the same pattern, then. I don't have much better ideas than this obvious one, though. Bernd, I'm totally on the same page with you. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: This problem of mine
On Tue, May 12, 2009 at 10:58 PM, Les Hazlewood lhazlew...@apache.org wrote: ...if the Incubator says the Ki podling must change its name, then fine, we'll be happy to do so, but most of us didn't want to spend the effort worrying about it unless necessary If that can help, I'm happy to start a vote here so that Incubator PMC members can decide if a name change is needed. There's no perfect solution, so having an external instance make the decision might help the project. -Bertrand - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: This problem of mine
On Tue, May 12, 2009 at 5:14 PM, Alan D. Cabrera l...@toolazydogs.com wrote: ...I'd like someone to come up with a concise argument that would allow me to let this go other than nope, it's not the same. Otherwise, I feel that I need to bring up a vote to put the issue to bed once and for all The only thing that I can say is that from the ASF's point of view your project's name is Apache Ki, no just Ki. About the actual risks associated with FixFlyer's considering that Apache Ki infringes on their trademarks, the best might be to ask legal-disc...@apache.org. -Bertrand - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: This problem of mine
Bertrand Delacretaz wrote: On Tue, May 12, 2009 at 5:14 PM, Alan D. Cabrera l...@toolazydogs.com wrote: ...I'd like someone to come up with a concise argument that would allow me to let this go other than nope, it's not the same. Otherwise, I feel that I need to bring up a vote to put the issue to bed once and for all The only thing that I can say is that from the ASF's point of view your project's name is Apache Ki, no just Ki. About the actual risks associated with FixFlyer's considering that Apache Ki infringes on their trademarks, the best might be to ask legal-disc...@apache.org. I won't jump into the project again, but in this case, I have a bit more info to provide. The problem has been postponed to le...@a.o months ago, not with a big success. I mentioned the case during ACEU to at least 3 persons, two of them being from the board. All of them told me to send the problem to PRC (so far, no answer), mentioning that it was not worth the risk to fight Juniper or any other company if the name was already used. This is something I don't get, and I see at least two problems here : 1) there is no clear process to solve such issues. Should it be processed by legal or PRC ? Plus those two entities are not responsive, and if we receive answer, they may be contradictory. Again, we don't need opinion, we need a clear and legal position. Opinions don't pay the bill when it comes to pay a lawyer. 2) I *think* than instead bothering everyone in all those instances, the easiest way to solve this issue was to change the name. But it seems that some people don't like simple solutions... As a consequence, it lasts forever (around one year, so far). Otherwise, I totally agree with what Alan has written. -- -- cordialement, regards, Emmanuel Lécharny www.iktek.com directory.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: This problem of mine
On May 12, 2009, at 9:06 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz wrote: On Tue, May 12, 2009 at 5:14 PM, Alan D. Cabrera l...@toolazydogs.com wrote: ...I'd like someone to come up with a concise argument that would allow me to let this go other than nope, it's not the same. Otherwise, I feel that I need to bring up a vote to put the issue to bed once and for all The only thing that I can say is that from the ASF's point of view your project's name is Apache Ki, no just Ki. So, this is an interesting point. Can we change Apache Geronimo's name to Apache WebSphere and get a way with it? About the actual risks associated with FixFlyer's considering that Apache Ki infringes on their trademarks, the best might be to ask legal-disc...@apache.org. Do we want to get into this kind of tussle straight out of the gate w/ a podling that's been using this name for such short while? Regards, Alan - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: This problem of mine
On May 12, 2009, at 10:56 AM, Alan D. Cabrera wrote: On May 12, 2009, at 9:06 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz wrote: On Tue, May 12, 2009 at 5:14 PM, Alan D. Cabrera l...@toolazydogs.com wrote: ...I'd like someone to come up with a concise argument that would allow me to let this go other than nope, it's not the same. Otherwise, I feel that I need to bring up a vote to put the issue to bed once and for all The only thing that I can say is that from the ASF's point of view your project's name is Apache Ki, no just Ki. So, this is an interesting point. Can we change Apache Geronimo's name to Apache WebSphere and get a way with it? The main point is that you and I disagree on whether FixFlyer Ki and Apache Ki are in the same domain. I have neither broad nor deep experience with securities trading systems, but I do know what financial securities are. And I claim that someone knowledgeable enough about computer systems to be in a position to evaluate software for securities trading systems, should know the difference between Java security and Securities Trading. But to answer your question, if Apache WebSphere were a loose-knit pajama bottom, I doubt that anyone would complain about the name conflict. As it is, Geronimo and WebSphere are in the same domain. Craig About the actual risks associated with FixFlyer's considering that Apache Ki infringes on their trademarks, the best might be to ask legal-disc...@apache.org. Do we want to get into this kind of tussle straight out of the gate w/ a podling that's been using this name for such short while? Regards, Alan - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org Craig L Russell Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://db.apache.org/jdo 408 276-5638 mailto:craig.russ...@sun.com P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp! smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
Re: This problem of mine
On Tue, May 12, 2009 at 2:22 PM, Alan D. Cabrera l...@toolazydogs.comwrote: On Tue, May 12, 2009 at 5:14 PM, Alan D. Cabrera l...@toolazydogs.com wrote: ...I'd like someone to come up with a concise argument that would allow me to let this go other than nope, it's not the same. Otherwise, I feel that I need to bring up a vote to put the issue to bed once and for all The only thing that I can say is that from the ASF's point of view your project's name is Apache Ki, no just Ki. So, this is an interesting point. Can we change Apache Geronimo's name to Apache WebSphere and get a way with it? The main point is that you and I disagree on whether FixFlyer Ki and Apache Ki are in the same domain. I have neither broad nor deep experience with securities trading systems, but I do know what financial securities are. And I claim that someone knowledgeable enough about computer systems to be in a position to evaluate software for securities trading systems, should know the difference between Java security and Securities Trading. I think you missed my point and that is that they are comparing their Java security system, not the financial instruments, against JSecurity's. Both provide the same functionality where their vertical application overlaps with our horizontal application, that is, Java security. Really? Where do they make that comparison? This is the first I've heard of such a thing. They were asking us to reconsider the name 'Ki' explicitly because it might cause confusion to and end-user community (e.g. if I was googling for FixFlyer's 'Ki' and found instead Apache's Ki, I might be confused). They made no such claim of functionality overlap that I'm aware of. Cheers, Les
Re: This problem of mine
On May 12, 2009, at 11:22 AM, Alan D. Cabrera wrote: On May 12, 2009, at 11:12 AM, Craig L Russell wrote: On May 12, 2009, at 10:56 AM, Alan D. Cabrera wrote: On May 12, 2009, at 9:06 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz wrote: On Tue, May 12, 2009 at 5:14 PM, Alan D. Cabrera l...@toolazydogs.com wrote: ...I'd like someone to come up with a concise argument that would allow me to let this go other than nope, it's not the same. Otherwise, I feel that I need to bring up a vote to put the issue to bed once and for all The only thing that I can say is that from the ASF's point of view your project's name is Apache Ki, no just Ki. So, this is an interesting point. Can we change Apache Geronimo's name to Apache WebSphere and get a way with it? The main point is that you and I disagree on whether FixFlyer Ki and Apache Ki are in the same domain. I have neither broad nor deep experience with securities trading systems, but I do know what financial securities are. And I claim that someone knowledgeable enough about computer systems to be in a position to evaluate software for securities trading systems, should know the difference between Java security and Securities Trading. I think you missed my point and that is that they are comparing their Java security system, not the financial instruments, against JSecurity's. Not what I said. Both provide the same functionality where their vertical application overlaps with our horizontal application, that is, Java security. There's no evidence of this that I can see. Maybe we're looking at different source documents? It is not unusual to see companies break out pieces a product line and open source them. So I went to the FixFlyer web site yet again, and can't find any evidence that they are in the same application domain. Neither the Ki Certification web page http://www.fixflyer.com/html-files/KiCertification.html nor their pdf http://www.fixflyer.com/materials/software/Ki/FlyerKiCertification.pdf mentions the word security. Craig Regards, Alan Craig About the actual risks associated with FixFlyer's considering that Apache Ki infringes on their trademarks, the best might be to ask legal-disc...@apache.org. Do we want to get into this kind of tussle straight out of the gate w/ a podling that's been using this name for such short while? Regards, Alan - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org Craig L Russell Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://db.apache.org/jdo 408 276-5638 mailto:craig.russ...@sun.com P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp! - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org Craig L Russell Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://db.apache.org/jdo 408 276-5638 mailto:craig.russ...@sun.com P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp! smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
Re: This problem of mine
On Tue, May 12, 2009 at 21:46, Craig L Russell craig.russ...@sun.com wrote: On May 12, 2009, at 11:22 AM, Alan D. Cabrera wrote: On May 12, 2009, at 11:12 AM, Craig L Russell wrote: On May 12, 2009, at 10:56 AM, Alan D. Cabrera wrote: On May 12, 2009, at 9:06 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz wrote: On Tue, May 12, 2009 at 5:14 PM, Alan D. Cabrera l...@toolazydogs.com wrote: ...I'd like someone to come up with a concise argument that would allow me to let this go other than nope, it's not the same. Otherwise, I feel that I need to bring up a vote to put the issue to bed once and for all The only thing that I can say is that from the ASF's point of view your project's name is Apache Ki, no just Ki. So, this is an interesting point. Can we change Apache Geronimo's name to Apache WebSphere and get a way with it? The main point is that you and I disagree on whether FixFlyer Ki and Apache Ki are in the same domain. I have neither broad nor deep experience with securities trading systems, but I do know what financial securities are. And I claim that someone knowledgeable enough about computer systems to be in a position to evaluate software for securities trading systems, should know the difference between Java security and Securities Trading. I think you missed my point and that is that they are comparing their Java security system, not the financial instruments, against JSecurity's. Not what I said. Both provide the same functionality where their vertical application overlaps with our horizontal application, that is, Java security. There's no evidence of this that I can see. Maybe we're looking at different source documents? It is not unusual to see companies break out pieces a product line and open source them. So I went to the FixFlyer web site yet again, and can't find any evidence that they are in the same application domain. Neither the Ki Certification web page http://www.fixflyer.com/html-files/KiCertification.html nor their pdf http://www.fixflyer.com/materials/software/Ki/FlyerKiCertification.pdf mentions the word security. Craig Regards, Alan Craig About the actual risks associated with FixFlyer's considering that Apache Ki infringes on their trademarks, the best might be to ask legal-disc...@apache.org. Do we want to get into this kind of tussle straight out of the gate w/ a podling that's been using this name for such short while? What I don't get is why would anyone want to keep the name if there are potential overlaps or troubles ahead? I mean, there are probably better (coding) and harder (releasing, graduating) things to do than getting stuck about the name. Why don't you (as a podling) simply move on with another cool name, for example, just brainstorming here... JSecurity... or something similar? Have fun, Bernd - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: This problem of mine
On Tue, May 12, 2009 at 8:12 PM, Craig L Russell craig.russ...@sun.com wrote: The main point is that you and I disagree on whether FixFlyer Ki and Apache Ki are in the same domain. I have neither broad nor deep experience with securities trading systems, but I do know what financial securities are. And I claim that someone knowledgeable enough about computer systems to be in a position to evaluate software for securities trading systems, should know the difference between Java security and Securities Trading. The ASF position has in the past been to not challenge industry for a decision in court. If FixFlyer says that they think this is a problem for them (and/or us) we should take that seriously and try to avoid confrontation. It is too likely that they can toss a few 100k on legal, whereas we shouldn't. The fact that they reacted within a few months from the selection of the Apache Ki name, suggest that there is indeed an industry overlap. AFAIUI, the overlap is not per functionality but per industry, we would probably get away with a Apache Focus (Ford Focus) but maybe not a Apache Windows even if it was a mechanical gadget, we are in the same industry as Microsoft. So, Craig, I think your position in this case is weak, and Alan's argument is convincing and I would not like to hear that in court. My position is that the project should find another name. I know that the community has been through a painful such experience before, and I hope it can be made less stressful this time. Cheers -- Niclas Hedhman, Software Developer http://www.qi4j.org - New Energy for Java I live here; http://tinyurl.com/2qq9er I work here; http://tinyurl.com/2ymelc I relax here; http://tinyurl.com/2cgsug - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: This problem of mine
On Tue, May 12, 2009 at 3:55 PM, Bernd Fondermann bernd.fonderm...@googlemail.com wrote: What I don't get is why would anyone want to keep the name if there are potential overlaps or troubles ahead? I mean, there are probably better (coding) and harder (releasing, graduating) things to do than getting stuck about the name. Why don't you (as a podling) simply move on with another cool name, for example, just brainstorming here... JSecurity... or something similar? JSecurity was deemed as a potential naming conflict risk (much in the same way Ki is now), so we dropped it, and finally came to a vote to change the name to Ki. But this resolution took over 4 or 5 months to finally come to a favorable vote, so we didn't want to go through that painful process all over again, since it seemed like no one was willing to come to consensus on other names. It is very difficult to find an even remotely-correlated name in the security space that might not infringe on another site/company/product/trademark/patent. Given the difficulty and the enormous amount of time spent already, we just wanted to move on to focus exactly on the things you mention, and only worry about changing the name yet again if it was absolutely required by the Incubator to do so. That being said, if the Incubator says the Ki podling must change its name, then fine, we'll be happy to do so, but most of us didn't want to spend the effort worrying about it unless necessary. Regards, Les
Re: This problem of mine
On Tue, May 12, 2009 at 22:58, Les Hazlewood lhazlew...@apache.org wrote: On Tue, May 12, 2009 at 3:55 PM, Bernd Fondermann bernd.fonderm...@googlemail.com wrote: What I don't get is why would anyone want to keep the name if there are potential overlaps or troubles ahead? I mean, there are probably better (coding) and harder (releasing, graduating) things to do than getting stuck about the name. Why don't you (as a podling) simply move on with another cool name, for example, just brainstorming here... JSecurity... or something similar? JSecurity was deemed as a potential naming conflict risk (much in the same way Ki is now), so we dropped it, and finally came to a vote to change the name to Ki. But this resolution took over 4 or 5 months to finally come to a favorable vote, so we didn't want to go through that painful process all over again, since it seemed like no one was willing to come to consensus on other names. It is very difficult to find an even remotely-correlated name in the security space that might not infringe on another site/company/product/trademark/patent. ok, I see. At least, for JSecurity, these conflicts never came up, did they? That's why so many project go with names from biona or mythology. Given the difficulty and the enormous amount of time spent already, we just wanted to move on to focus exactly on the things you mention, and only worry about changing the name yet again if it was absolutely required by the Incubator to do so. That being said, if the Incubator says the Ki podling must change its name, then fine, we'll be happy to do so, but most of us didn't want to spend the effort worrying about it unless necessary. To me, it seems neccessary, but this is just my 2 eurocent. Bernd - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: This problem of mine
On Tue, May 12, 2009 at 11:10 PM, Les Hazlewood lhazlew...@apache.org wrote: How do you check to ensure that the name is actually usable? We did a lot of due diligence on Ki, checked USPTO searches for patents/trademarks on Ki and found not a single result, and performed lots of google searching and still we're in the current predicament. How does one ever rest assured the name is 'safe' unless you just pick complete gibberish? It never is safe. If you have zero hits on Google it is 'more safe' than there is 300 millions, since you would not have a clue what all those hits are. But, even zero presence on the Net doesn't exclude people owning some trademarks. If I am not mistaken, Google is apparently settling Android at the moment. Only time will tell... It is largely a matter of reducing the risks. The fact that Apache Ki is challenged (at least softly) now is not a sign of failure for the last round of name change, more like bad luck. Cheers -- Niclas Hedhman, Software Developer http://www.qi4j.org - New Energy for Java I live here; http://tinyurl.com/2qq9er I work here; http://tinyurl.com/2ymelc I relax here; http://tinyurl.com/2cgsug - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: This problem of mine
Bernd Fondermann wrote: JSecurity was deemed as a potential naming conflict risk (much in the same way Ki is now), so we dropped it, and finally came to a vote to change the name to Ki. But this resolution took over 4 or 5 months to finally come to a favorable vote, so we didn't want to go through that painful process all over again, since it seemed like no one was willing to come to consensus on other names. It is very difficult to find an even remotely-correlated name in the security space that might not infringe on another site/company/product/trademark/patent. ok, I see. At least, for JSecurity, these conflicts never came up, did they? http://www.juniper.net/security/ That's why so many project go with names from biona or mythology. Given the difficulty and the enormous amount of time spent already, we just wanted to move on to focus exactly on the things you mention, and only worry about changing the name yet again if it was absolutely required by the Incubator to do so. That being said, if the Incubator says the Ki podling must change its name, then fine, we'll be happy to do so, but most of us didn't want to spend the effort worrying about it unless necessary. To me, it seems neccessary, but this is just my 2 eurocent. It took 4 months to move from JSecurity to Ki, just because, very like this thread, people are *discussing* for ever something which would be immediately solved if common sense was applied : avoid as much as possible any risk, and change the name if the risk is becoming a reality. It will take another 4 months to decide to switch from Ki to something more appropriate if we follow the same pattern. That's a waste of time and energy. Bernd, I'm totally on the same page with you. -- -- cordialement, regards, Emmanuel Lécharny www.iktek.com directory.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
