| |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
Christopher Blizzard of mozilla.org Speaks on the Firebird Naming Conflict (MozillaZine)Christopher Blizzard of mozilla.org Speaks on the Firebird Naming Conflict (MozillaZine)Posted May 15, 2003 1:38 UTC (Thu) by BrendanEich (guest, #11194)In reply to: Christopher Blizzard of mozilla.org Speaks on the Firebird Naming Conflict (MozillaZine) by msutherland Parent article: Christopher Blizzard of mozilla.org Speaks on the Firebird Naming Conflict (MozillaZine) > Look. No, you look. I'm not young, and I make mistakes often, and admit more than I care to count (which means I make still more, in total). In spite of my and others' flaws, Mozilla is nothing to sneeze at. It's more complete and standards-conformant than any other open source web browser, and it does other things like mail and news. Parts of it are used as platform components in many projects, open source and commercial. Mozilla has its share of problems, but what has that obvious truism to do with the topic at hand? "Mozilla has problems" does not mean "FirebirdSQL owns Firebird" in all software domains. It certainly doesn't mean that anyone owes FirebirdSQL.org restitution money, in spite of what shake-down artists here assert. > Asa Dotzler is well known.... Typical Pravda story lead-in: "As is well-known, [name deleted] is a tool of bourgeois reactionary forces...." Why don't you name just three cases, with quotes from primary sources, where someone failed to ever (sic) admit they are wrong about anything? While you are at it, show some humility and give us links to your confessions of imperfection. What's more, your screed is incoherently inconsistent. If Mozilla is a non-event, why does our use of Firebird as a project name harm FirebirdSQL.org? You can't have it both ways. /be
(Log in to post comments)
Christopher Blizzard of mozilla.org Speaks on the Firebird Naming Conflict (MozillaZine) Posted May 15, 2003 3:02 UTC (Thu) by msutherland (guest, #11201) [Link] Uh oh. Brendan Eich is here. What happened? Was a link to this article posted in a Mozilla newsgroup?
I beg to differ. Not only is Mozilla something to sneeze at... it is something worth laughing at, too. > It's more complete and standards-conformant than any other open source web browser Spare me the shiny fruit rhetoric... you say that as if it actually means something. > Mozilla has its share of problems, but what has that obvious truism to do with the topic at hand? Mozilla has problems? What year was it that you realized that? > Why don't you name just three cases, with quotes from primary sources, where someone failed to ever (sic) admit they are wrong about anything? While you are at it, show some humility and give us links to your confessions of imperfection. Here you go: http://www.mozillazine.org/archive.html Happy Reading! > What's more, your screed is incoherently inconsistent. If Mozilla is a non-event, why does our use of Firebird as a project name harm FirebirdSQL.org? You can't have it both ways. I love how you have just renamed Firebird to FirebirdSQL... To answer your question... I didn't know that Mozilla was being renamed to Firebird. If that was the case, then I would tell the Firebird folks that they have nothing to worry about... Mozilla is going nowhere. On the other hand, Phoenix doesn't amount to anything more than a wart on a lizards left testicle, either, so I'd say the Firbird crew are just protecting their name for principles sake because.... one never knows... Phoenix may... someday... amount to something worth shaking a stick at.
Christopher Blizzard of mozilla.org Speaks on the Firebird Naming Conflict (MozillaZine) Posted May 15, 2003 17:21 UTC (Thu) by BrendanEich (guest, #11194) [Link] Yeah, "Mozilla sucks, Phoenix doesn't amount to more than a wart, ...". So why the panic over our use of Firebird? And why does the great msutherland waste his time braying like a jackass about Mozilla? Sutherland, haven't you got better things to do? Let's hear about all your superior achievements. Better yet, go achieve some good thing and report back when you're done.FirebirdSQL, as in FirebirdSQL.org -- get it? I read slashdot.org, which led pretty directly here. Flames and trolls, we get enough of on slashdot. LWN.net doesn't need this. /be
Christopher Blizzard of mozilla.org Speaks on the Firebird Naming Conflict (MozillaZine) Posted May 15, 2003 18:11 UTC (Thu) by msutherland (guest, #11201) [Link] > Yeah, "Mozilla sucks, Phoenix doesn't amount to more than a wart, ...".Well, it's good to see that you have come to your senses. How you people can be so arrogant, and exhalt, over such lame products is beyond comprehension. I'm just glad you fella's aren't in the OS business... Jesus, what a mess that would be.
I would have to say principle in that their playing it safe and being prudent in protecting and safeguarding their brandname they have fostered over the last three years or so. Outside of that, I have no clue. Quite frankly, if I had a software product called Firebird... and it came to my attention that some clown over at Mozilla.org named one of their shabby products, Firebird... it wouldn't phase or worry me in the least.
Are you kidding? And miss out on the opportunity of telling Brendan Eich, the Grand Daddy of JavaScript, what a complete and total mess Mozilla.org has made of themselves? Not in a million years would I miss this.
At the moment, no. > FirebirdSQL, as in FirebirdSQL.org -- get it? My apologies. I meant to quote this bit: "Mozilla has problems" does not mean "FirebirdSQL owns Firebird"
Christopher Blizzard of mozilla.org Speaks on the Firebird Naming Conflict (MozillaZine) Posted May 16, 2003 16:03 UTC (Fri) by Baylink (subscriber, #755) [Link] His arguments and rhetoric are sane, and have content.Your replies don't appear to. Save us the ad hominem, ok?
Mozilla.org == Sorry Bunch of Lying Bastards! Posted May 18, 2003 12:22 UTC (Sun) by msutherland (guest, #11201) [Link] Trademark registration is not required for trademark validity. Use in trade is sufficient. Trademark registration, by itself, doesn't establish the validity of a mark, but it does move the question into Federal courts.Firebird is in the process of registering the mark "Firebird". The Mozilla group will have opportunity to explain to the US Patent Office their various quaint and creative reasons what Firebird isn't a valid trademark for a database but is for a browser. Then the venue will shift to Federal court. The issues aren't subtle or difficult to master. Firebird has been using the trademark uncontested for three years. They're really nothing left to be said but determine damages. To further add to my complete disprespect of the Mozilla community.... 1. Mozillazine taking the Firebird name and appending a (TM) to it in their forums. In their flawed arrogance, they thought they were being cute. I look at as them acting like a bunch of backward ass nitwit twirps. Lucky for them they recently became endowed with the brains to remove it. 2. In a failed effort to save their sorry faces, they later claim that when they announced their name change from Phoenix to Firebird that they had meant at that time, and all along, that the Firebird was just the 'project' name... and that the 'product' name was Mozilla Browser. That, of course, is load of vile bullshit for several reasons..... Here's the announcement: "Asa Dotzler writes: After months of discussion and further months of legal investigation, we're finally comfortable moving forward with new names. The new name for the Phoenix browser is 'Firebird'. The documentation and product strings will be updated soon. In addition to securing Firebird, we've also got the OK from those contributing legal resources to use the name 'Thunderbird' for a mail client. Hopefully this will be the end of naming legal issues for a while." http://www.mozillazine.org/talkback.html?article=3075 A. There is absolutely no mention, not even a remote hint, that the name Firbird is simply a project name. In fact, the supposed 'product' name, Mozilla Browser, as you can see, is not even cited. B. If Firebird was meant as a 'project' name... then there is no requirement to 'run it through legal' C. Asa Dotzler was even specifically asked what the *product* name would be by a community member: "SUBJECT: Product Names http://www.mozillazine.org/talkback.html?article=3075&message=44&state=reply Asa's reply.... "SUBJECT: Re: Product Names --Asa" http://www.mozillazine.org/talkback.html?article=3075&message=54&state=reply
|
|
||||||||||||