What does Firebird really want from Mozilla [LWN.net]

What does Firebird really want from Mozilla

Posted May 15, 2003 6:19 UTC (Thu) by aditseng (guest, #11209)
In reply to: Another name for "apathetic" that tells the true story by roskegg
Parent article: Christopher Blizzard of mozilla.org Speaks on the Firebird Naming Conflict (MozillaZine)

I can't figure it out.

The more the "controversy" continues, the more I feel that FireBirdSQL is slowly going broke and they were looking for the best chance they could to sponge some money off the nearest guy who got caught in their net.

Did Mozilla do wrong?

Possibly; at least they could certainly have done better... Chris Blizzard aptly put it as apathetic - nothing more. Certainly not criminal negligence when you send it to a team of lawyers to vet (and TM) that there is no legal issues with it. Sure, your argument is that there are legal issues, but these are things that lawyers can fight about for years to come with no gain either to FireBirdSQL or to Mozilla Firebird.

Has FireBirdSQL lost something irrevocably out of the controversy?

Yes. Their reputation. Not as makers of a great piece of software, but for their unmitigated rant (hate?) campaign against Mozilla. What are their arguments?
1. Mozilla stole our Firebird name:
Alright even if that is granted, they have informed FirebirdSQL, the Mozilla fan(atics) and the rest of the world that FireBird is actually (A) Mozilla Firebird (B) A Mozilla PROJECT (not product) name and (C) would finally give way to the Mozilla Browser (note the fact that FireBird cannot be found in the name MOZILLA BROWSER!)

2. Mozilla has harmed our branding etc.
People who didn't even know that FireBirdSQL existed now do. How many News.Com readers have seen an article about FireBirdSQL in the last two years (certainly not me, and I read the articles every single day). But there have been numerous articles about Mozilla. Who is the gainer here? Google rankings have gone awry. Sure, perhaps they did. But FirebirdSQL was NOT the FIRST on the list before the controversy (in a search for only FIREBIRD) and now thanks to this controversy (and the great guys at google) it IS THE FIRST! Isn't that cool guys! Here they are claiming that things have gone bad when FireBirdSQL (incl IBPhoenix et. al) show up no less than four times in the top ten and Mozilla FireBird doesn't show up even once in the top twenty. Sure Google changed the ranking, but who benefitted? Mozilla?

3. Mozilla (and Moz developers) are arrogant etc. etc. etc.
Yes, they have been very quiet on the issue. But who can blame them. Chris Blizzard in an interview with Mozillazine says that they WERE to blame for not contacting FireBirdSQL before they came out with the name Mozilla FireBird, but instead of accepting that as an unmitigated statement of regret, people (who know who you are) are accusing him of being mealy mouthed! Apart from everything else name-calling is really really low. Moz developers have from the start not wanted to get into any controversy, and by not saying that much to the public are they being arrogant? I think not.

4. Mozilla has damaged the reputation of the OSS comunity.
Sure, just as much as FireBirdSQL has. The deal should have been Mozilla has done this to us, we are upset, we will send a polite letter of enquiry, expect a response and then if nothing happens follow it up with further action (at that point possibly even legal). Instead mud-raking and mud-slinging is what they got down to from the start. An apology doesn't take that back just as a simple apology wouldn't have made a difference if Mozilla decided to use FireBird for a brand name. FireBirdSQL wanted a brand name review and they got it. What more are they looking for?

As for the rest of
"Mozilla, and before it Netscape, has had a culture of extreme arrogance."
I can't even being to understand how anyone can say this. I started using Mozilla since M5 and the first public gecko build and they have been anything but arrogant. Any time there was some issue the forums and the newsgroups have been full of back and forth (polite) comments until one party or another agreed that they were in the wrong. Mozilla has gone a long way from being a theoretical rewrite of the complete Netscape code. Some say they have gone too far (too big), but that was the idea of re-creating how Mozilla - the product(s) - work.

Apple went with Konqueror because Mozilla was far too big and bloated. The Mozilla developers (who are soooo arrogant) realised that they had got on the wrong train a few stops down the line and they are changing their path to keep on the right track. My that is as arrogant as somebody gets. Instead of whining about Apple's choice (with flame wars) they got down and did something about it. Quietly and quickly. I have to hand it to those guys. They are as corrupt, inefficient, mealy mouthed, self centered, technically incompetent and arrogant as anybody on the planet.

(Log in to post comments)

Mozilla.org == Sorry Bunch of Lying Bastards!

Posted May 18, 2003 12:21 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
As these are just product names, they will presumably be fully refered to as 'Mozilla Firebird' and 'Mozilla Thunderbird', just as you would 'Microsoft Internet Explorer'?"

http://www.mozillazine.org/talkback.html?article=3075&message=44&state=reply

Asa's reply....

"SUBJECT: Re: Product Names
Yes. We have the Mozilla Firebird browser and the Mozilla Thunderbird email client.

--Asa"

http://www.mozillazine.org/talkback.html?article=3075&message=54&state=reply

In short, not only now is Mozilla.org a bunch of backward ass nitwit twirps.... they are also a bunch pathetic liars... unworthy of the oxygen that their putrid mouths rape from the earths atmosphere.