LWN: Comments on "Christopher Blizzard of mozilla.org Speaks on the Firebird Naming Conflict (MozillaZine)"

Christopher Blizzard of mozilla.org Speaks on the Firebird Naming Conflict (MozillaZine)

Harrison — Sat, 03 Jan 2004 16:17:27 +0000

http://www.flyfirebird.com/
http://www.firebirdarts.com/
http://www.firebirdbooks.com/

Honestly, I don't see them complaining. True, their product(s) have nothing to do with a browser, so there's no competition, right?

What's a browser got to do with a database then? They're both computer-related, but they've got no competetion between one another.

And I also don't see IBPhoenix complaining about them either. What if Firebird Books suddenly replaced Barnes&Noble and now, when you searched on google, got the first 20 hits?

IBPhoenix is making a big deal out of nothing. It's a name, and not a very original one from what I can tell. I mean, do you know how many companies and products are named "Phoenix?" I don't see them suing each other. Examples:
Phoenix Technologies
IBPhoenix
Boston Phoenix
Project Phoenix (http://www.seti.org/science/ph-bg.html)
StarPhoenix (http://www.canada.com/saskatoon/starphoenix/)
PHOENIX CORPORATION (http://www.phoenixcorp.com/)

Sure, the names vary slightly. But so do "Firebird" and "Mozilla Firebird."

WRONG!

brobinson — Thu, 01 Jan 2004 16:49:20 +0000

You've posted this what 10 times?

The lack of a TM registration led to the belief that it was not someone's trademark causing the whole debacle. That is what is being said. I don't believe they mean it as a reason why they can go ahead and use it, though they CAN use "Mozilla Firebird" but not "Firebird".

Personally, I wish they'd have chosen different names to begin with.

Mediation

brobinson — Thu, 01 Jan 2004 16:49:17 +0000

Do you work for Microsoft?

Weird example of Mozilla incompetence, then?

CRConrad — Tue, 27 May 2003 07:46:22 +0000

"mlx"

[quoting someone else:]
It doesn't take two months to run "Mozilla Browser" through your lawyers
[replies:] no, but that name is taken by the current Mozilla browser.

So you guys have never heard of version numbers?

Suuuuuurrrrrreeeee.....

rafaelri — Mon, 19 May 2003 19:17:16 +0000

What the hell you do??? For sure you aren't a developer... May be u just use Word for doing school tasks...

Peace?

frodoballs — Mon, 19 May 2003 05:38:59 +0000

You know, the real problem here is that engineers aren't usually good diplomats. It speaks
rather badly of Mozilla.org's adult supervision that they allowed engineers to handle this
name change and then didn't rein them in when the firestorm began. A simple 'Mea Culpa'
early on from Mozilla would have done wonders for PR on both sides of the fence.

And it doesn't matter who's right -- the point is that the situation as it stands is in no one's
best interest. Sometimes you have to be an adult and stand on higher ground. Seems like
Mozilla's allowing themselves to be driven by engineering ego, at least just a little bit...

Mozilla.org == Sorry Bunch of Lying Bastards!

msutherland — Sun, 18 May 2003 22:22:04 +0000

> Your attitude alone has pretty much soured my opinion of the entire Firebird (the database) community.

I have news for you, Tonto... I have *nothing* to do with the Firebird database so feel free to make like a fart and blow back to the disgraceful and pathetic joke of an organization that is Mozilla.org.

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.

Mozilla.org == Sorry Bunch of Lying Bastards!

zangdesign — Sun, 18 May 2003 13:32:00 +0000

Your attitude alone has pretty much soured my opinion of the entire Firebird (the database)
community. You heap calumny and vituperation on the Mozilla organization without offering
any solid reasons, beyond some some reference to arrogance, stupidity, and some other
vague references.

I'm curious -- where's the beef? Do you have concrete reasons for your hatred or are you
just mouthing off because you can hide behind the anonymity of a web forum?

Another name for "apathetic" that tells the true story

zangdesign — Sun, 18 May 2003 13:13:56 +0000

Mr. Walther,

From your comments, it sounds like you stepped into this mess biased against Mozilla,
which makes you a piss-poor mediator, in my opinion.

i fail to see how Mozilla was at fault here, and no one has yet satisfactorily explained how
the two products could possible be confused, even with the same name, since they have
non-intersecting target audiences.

Mozilla should have told the Firebird team to piss off, or better yet, just ignored them.
Notably, IBPhoenix didn't raise a stick over the browser of a remarkable similar name (i.e.,
Phoenix). Why is that? Not enough publicity?

This whole incident reads as a pathetic attempt by the Firebird organization to scam some
free press by inventing a incident and then attempting to capitalize on it by manipulating
the truth.

Mozilla.org == Sorry Bunch of Lying Bastards!

msutherland — Sun, 18 May 2003 12:22:46 +0000

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....

Here's the announcement:

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

Mozilla.org == Sorry Bunch of Lying Bastards!

msutherland — Sun, 18 May 2003 12:22:07 +0000

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....

Here's the announcement:

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

Mozilla.org == Sorry Bunch of Lying Bastards!

msutherland — Sun, 18 May 2003 12:21:32 +0000

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....

Here's the announcement:

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

Mozilla.org == Sorry Bunch of Lying Bastards!

msutherland — Sun, 18 May 2003 12:20:24 +0000

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....

Here's the announcement:

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

Mozilla.org == Sorry Bunch of Lying Bastards!

msutherland — Sun, 18 May 2003 12:19:42 +0000

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....

Here's the announcement:

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

Mozilla.org == Sorry Bunch of Lying Bastards!

msutherland — Sun, 18 May 2003 12:18:34 +0000

> What are you accusing mozilla.org of?

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....

Here's the announcement:

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

Mozilla.org == Sorry Bunch of Lying Bastards!

msutherland — Sun, 18 May 2003 12:17:14 +0000

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....

Here's the announcement:

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

WRONG!

msutherland — Sun, 18 May 2003 12:16:10 +0000

"There is no doubt that Firebird SQL has been around longer than Mozilla, and I believe that at least some of the Mozilla team should have heard of it before their TM application. However, there is no Trademark registered for Firebird by the Firebird SQL team that I can find in a TM search, and Mozilla's lawyers were correct in stating that the term was not obstructed (though it might have been - unbeknownst to the lawyers - unregisterable due to prior use from Firebird SQL and BBS). To me, that makes those defending Firebird (including the Firebird Website) look like a bunch of radical fanatics compared to the rational if somewhat defensive statements given by the Mozilla team."

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....

Here's the announcement:

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

Another name for "apathetic" that tells the true story

hmm — Sun, 18 May 2003 06:41:58 +0000

Yawn.

Don't bother responding to this drivel people. A simple google of the man and his web pages indicates he's really not mentally stable enough to waste the time with rational discourse.

Christopher Blizzard of mozilla.org Speaks on the Firebird Naming Conflict (MozillaZine)

HansB — Sat, 17 May 2003 22:33:22 +0000

When you see a person drowning, and you are too "apathetic" to throw them a life preserver, that is known in the legal industry as "criminal negligence". I view the actions of the Mozilla team in this case as nothing less.

Firebird was a growing brand that ranked at the top of the Google listings. Mozilla's actions destroyed that search engine goodness, possibly for quite a long time, seriously diluting and confusing their trademark, and reducing the value of the hard work they put into their product.

Mozilla acted in the wrong, and I think they should make monetary restitution to the Firebird team, instead of mealy mouthed weasel words from people like Christopher Blizzard.

It is not my fault that different news writeups of the conflict gave me credit as a mediator; I explicitly told them several times "Mozilla had this thing in the works before I came along; my role was in helping the two sides start talking to each other." I resent Christophers characterization of myself as a Johnny-come-lately just trying to grab credit. I invested a fair bit of time in this, even before I was asked to mediate.

The Firebird project apologized to the Mozilla team, even though they were in the right. It shows the true state of Mozillas moral capital that they have not made any such apology in return, even though their actions were far more grievious.

Mozilla, and before it Netscape, has had a culture of extreme arrogance. I have observed this over a period of more than 5 years. This culture of arrogance smells like shit, and I'm glad the conflict is over and I don't have to deal with it and act as if it didn't stink. If Konqueror could run independently of KDE, I would never recommend Mozilla to anyone again.

Christopher Blizzard of mozilla.org Speaks on the Firebird Naming Conflict (MozillaZine)

gerv — Fri, 16 May 2003 22:19:17 +0000

After reading through these posts, though, I am now not so sure of that. In fact, it has become quite clear to me that Mozilla.org is one screwed up organization.

<snip more un-constructive abuse>

It would be more informative if you stated what in these threads led you to this conclusion, apart from the unsupported and polemical assertions of others. What are you accusing mozilla.org of?

Gerv

Wow! Such harshness...

faerealm — Fri, 16 May 2003 20:05:32 +0000

Despite any arguments one way or the other, I must agree as an outside commentator that msutherland and Mr. Walther's comments amount to a pile of ad hominem crap external to the actual matter in debate.

There is no doubt that Firebird SQL has been around longer than Mozilla, and I believe that at least some of the Mozilla team should have heard of it before their TM application. However, there is no Trademark registered for Firebird by the Firebird SQL team that I can find in a TM search, and Mozilla's lawyers were correct in stating that the term was not obstructed (though it might have been - unbeknownst to the lawyers - unregisterable due to prior use from Firebird SQL and BBS). To me, that makes those defending Firebird (including the Firebird Website) look like a bunch of radical fanatics compared to the rational if somewhat defensive statements given by the Mozilla team.

Any claim of search rankings is ludicrous - if I wanted to search for the Firebird SQL server, I wouldn't expect to find anything on just the term 'Firebird'. Adding in the word 'Database' or 'SQL' would immediately screen out Mozilla products (or projects), as well as a bazillion pages for cars, sports teams, and myths.

In short, get over it. The whole thing's been hyped all out of proportion.

Peace?

Baylink — Fri, 16 May 2003 16:13:59 +0000

Apparently, Jon, no, you can't. :-}

Christopher Blizzard of mozilla.org Speaks on the Firebird Naming Conflict (MozillaZine)

Baylink — Fri, 16 May 2003 16:03:28 +0000

His arguments and rhetoric are sane, and have content.

Your replies don't appear to.

Save us the ad hominem, ok?

Logistics

Baylink — Fri, 16 May 2003 15:20:13 +0000

And *please*, figure out some visible way to quote.

I can't follow who's saying what.

No theft, it's `trademark dilution'

Max.Hyre — Fri, 16 May 2003 12:33:17 +0000

Dear me, now we're calling it `theft' to reuse a common name?

Before you get even more worked up, think about how the MPAA and the RIAA are characterizing fair use of copyrighted material, look at what RMS has to say on`theft' wrt copyright, or on different laws for granting monopolies on ideas, then think carefully about your choice of words.

If we get too wound up in our furor, some concepts we hold very dear (including running Free Software, should Microsoft's Palladium ever take hold) may end up on the trash-heap of history.

Best wishes,
Max Hyre

What are you trying to say exactly?

tpv — Fri, 16 May 2003 01:16:50 +0000

We are doing our best to accommodate their concerns and worries. However, that does not extend to delaying the release of the Mozilla Firebird Browser 0.6 another two months while we run another name through the lawyers who cleared the current one.
That sounds to me to be a polite way of saying: "We made a mistake but we want other people to carry the cost of the mistake, because it would be too hard for us to fix it ourselves".
If Mozilla stands by their decision to market the browser under the "Firebird" name (and the annoucement was marketing) then it is a very sad indictment on the organisation.
If, on the other hand, Mozilla concedes that the decision was a mistake, then have the guts to pay the price yourselves. Don't expect other to deal with your mistakes.

Given the history of delays in the mozilla project, it seems strange to care about a 2 month delay now.

Mediation

i5mast — Thu, 15 May 2003 21:12:44 +0000

"he who said it is an intelligent, rational, and, most of all, honest person"
that may well be true but it doesn't help in a mediation process.

Secrets in the software industry? Hah!

msutherland — Thu, 15 May 2003 19:18:04 +0000

> I'm offended that you offer this name calling and conspiricy theory in defense of it.

Good.

Secrets in the software industry? Hah!

erikharrison — Thu, 15 May 2003 18:58:21 +0000

So, previously you state that there is something rotten in the state of Mozilla, and only your in-view (which you will not reveal) allows you to see through the skein of Blizzard's lies. Now you claim that Apple also sees this corruption and secretly worked with the KDE team to avoid it, then lied in public to cover that secrecy and their hatred of the project?

What?

Sir, as someone who respects what the FirebirdSQL project has been through prior to this debacle, I'm offended that you offer this name calling and conspiricy theory in defense of it. What respect the project has will be destroyed by statements like this. While no one will come off clean from this, and both sides (and, it seems, the moderators) have acted badly, FirebirdSQL *is* a small project, and does not need this kind of reputation. Google rank be damned, you make them look bad in the mind of the developer community.

Christopher Blizzard of mozilla.org Speaks on the Firebird Naming Conflict (MozillaZine)

msutherland — Thu, 15 May 2003 18:11:13 +0000

> 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.

> So why the panic over our use of Firebird?

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.

> And why does the great msutherland waste his time braying like a jackass about Mozilla?

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.

> Sutherland, haven't you got better things to do?

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)

BrendanEich — Thu, 15 May 2003 17:21:10 +0000

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

Any news is good news

Makali — Thu, 15 May 2003 17:15:23 +0000

Two points:

1. As the subject above says, the upshot of this whole controversy is that more people know about IBPhoenix and the Firebird database project than ever before.

2. If someone is looking for an open source relational database, they do NOT search for Firebird. Don't be silly. They'd google for "free database" or "open source database". And hell, people search again if they don't find what they want; if "firebird" didn't come up with the database on the first page, the chances are that they'd search again for "firebird database". The "damage" you claim is small at best; and the case for a financial damages claim wouldn't stand up in court. As countless others have said in this comment thread, "Let it go, man". An apology from Mozilla might be nice, simply out of courtesy, but the more salt you rub into the wound, the less likely it is that one will be forthcoming.

Bonus third point: If someone produced a new skateboard, or a film or TV show called Firebird and it shot to the top of the google search for that term, what then? Would you write an angry letter to the film studio? I believe that the analogy is valid, despite the "But Mozilla and IBPhoenix should be on the same side!" caveat. These are very much dissimilar products, and while a naming clash is unfortunate, confusion over the name would be virtually non-existant outside of the Open-source "fandom". Remember, open-source is just the development model - it's a tenuous a link between two products, and outside of the small circle of people whose primary interest is open-source software, no one will give a damn that a free web browser and a free database have similar names.

Disclaimer: I use both Firebird and "that mozilla browser", but I'm not involved in either project, I'm not a lawyer, and I'm not even that clever.

Christopher Blizzard of mozilla.org Speaks on the Firebird Naming Conflict (MozillaZine)

csigle — Thu, 15 May 2003 16:58:06 +0000

I'm just a disinterested person. A disinterested person who doesn't have any involvement with either the Mozilla or Firebird SQL communites. Although I'm disinterested, I felt that I should waste my time reading through all of these comments and then compose and post a reply. FWIW, of course.

I was initially thinking that Firebird was simply over-reacting. After reading through these posts, though, I am now not so sure of that. In fact, it has become quite clear to me that Mozilla.org is one screwed up organization.

I'd like to specifically respond to this:

"Mozilla, and before it Netscape, has had a culture of extreme arrogance. I have observed this over a period of more than 5 years. This culture of arrogance smells like shit, and I'm glad the conflict is over and I don't have to deal with it and act as if it didn't stink."

I empathize deeply with your position. The foul stench from Mozilla/Netscape is an intense and putrid one, indeed. From what I've been reading, the sour and stale rants from the Mozilla community have proven to be quite toxic on ones nostrils.

I can only hope that, someday, a regime change will take place at Mozilla.org and that the new leadership will know better to flush their oral toilets, long before the shit piles up.

Oops

msutherland — Thu, 15 May 2003 16:26:34 +0000

> P.S.: I will only answer replies to the questions I have posted above.

You mean that if I don't answer your questions then you'll recoil back into your disinterested state?

Comment from someone mostly disinterested, FWIW

msutherland — Thu, 15 May 2003 16:25:43 +0000

> P.S.: I will only answer replies to the questions I have posted above.

You mean that if I don't answer your questions then you'll recoil back into your disinterested state?

Comment from someone mostly disinterested, FWIW

csigler — Thu, 15 May 2003 15:58:33 +0000

> Yeah right. Let me guess. You'll end up exhalting the shit-for-brains
> crew that is Mozilla.org. Spare me the bull, would ya.

Well, I believe that's up for debate. I said I believe Mozilla made a serious mistake in choosing the Firebird name. I also said I believe that they're on the right side of this naming dispute end game (not the whole dispute). So, to me, it's a little from Column A and a little from Column B.

I guess I find myself wondering why you'd accuse me of lying about being a (prior to this, mostly) disinterested party in this dispute? If you'd be so kind, please answer this question for me.

> So cool your jets, buddy. Don't hold my disgust of Mozilla.org against
> the Firebird Database people... I have nothing to do with them.

(With all due respect, your jets may be warm, but mine aren't.)

So, you only have an anti-Mozilla axe to grind, then? You have no standing in this dispute which will be affected by its outcome? Again, please be so kind as to answer these questions for me.

It's my opinion that the Firebird database folks are being greatly harmed by your willful, ignorant, and foul-mouthed attacks on Mozilla in this forum over the naming dispute.

... And if you're just some jerk who gets his jollies from flame-trolling, I apologize in advance to the LWN community for engaging you....

Clemmitt

P.S.: I will only answer replies to the questions I have posted above. Thanks.

Mediation

msutherland — Thu, 15 May 2003 15:50:51 +0000

asacarny and ajf,

The following statement...

"Mozilla, and before it Netscape, has had a culture of extreme arrogance. I have observed this over a period of more than 5 years."

...is merely evidence that he who said it is an intelligent, rational, and, most of all, honest person.

Comment from someone mostly disinterested, FWIW

msutherland — Thu, 15 May 2003 15:34:48 +0000

> I'm not a part of the Mozilla browser or Firebird database communities. Because of this, I've been mostly disinterested in this dispute so far. So, FWIW, here's my reaction to all of this noise:

Yeah right. Let me guess. You'll end up exhalting the shit-for-brains crew that is Mozilla.org. Spare me the bull, would ya.

> I certainly hope that the Firebird database supporters who've posted here (most notably roskegg and msutherland) are _not_ representative of the attitudes and behavior of the Firebird community as a whole.

You needn't concern yourself in my case. I came here via a link plastered on the front page of Mozillazine. Why was I at Mozillazine? I pop in every now and then to check on their latest whines and moans.

As far as the Firebird database... I don't use it. For that matter, I don't use Linux. Why the hell would I want to use Linux? So I can brag at office cocktail parties how I use GNUCash for personal finances? To show Bill Gates a thing or two? To play all day writing bash scripts? Or even worse... be stuck with the piece of garbage that is Mozilla? Get real, man. Linux as a desktop client is great for young geeks that are unable to operate a fishing pole, want to play with their operating system all day long, and who are too freaking ugly to get a date... let alone, have a life (free from mind altering drugs, at least).

So cool your jets, buddy. Don't hold my disgust of Mozilla.org against the Firebird Database people... I have nothing to do with them.

Mediation

asacarny — Thu, 15 May 2003 15:31:29 +0000

And yet he considers what he did to be mediating. That is a major problem.

Mediation

ajf — Thu, 15 May 2003 15:19:57 +0000

It's quite clear from his very first comment in this discussion that he did not enter this debate without unfavourable preconceptions concerning mozilla.org: "Mozilla, and before it Netscape, has had a culture of extreme arrogance. I have observed this over a period of more than 5 years."