Slashdot Log In
Firebird Name Debate Enters a New Stage
Posted by
CowboyNeal
on Fri Apr 18, 2003 02:03 AM
from the browser-by-any-other-name dept.
from the browser-by-any-other-name dept.
An anonymous reader writes "As many readers will know, mozilla.org was asked to change the name for their standalone browser, Phoenix as another browser had the same name. After months of discussion, the new name was announced as Mozilla Firebird. Despite the new name being approved by AOL Legal, supporters of the FirebirdSQL database were quick to object (though the name is also used by many other people). A coincidentally named supporter of FirebirdSQL, IBPhoenix, put up a slightly immature request for their readers to participate in mass posting campaign targetting mozilla.org developers' email accounts, newsgroups and even forums at independent sites such as MozillaZine and Slashdot. FirebirdSQL's official site later reiterated this message. However, IBPhoenix have now declared this shock-and-awe stage of their campaign over, heralding it a success. Their second stage calls for a more focussed email protest at just two of mozilla.org's members: Mitchell Baker (mozilla.org's leader) and Asa Dotzler (announcer of the name change). In addition, they ask their readers to move away from 'derogatory messages' and to show more 'courtesy'. Unsurprisingly, the beleaguered admins of affected sites such as MozillaZine have welcomed this change of direction. This is getting very interesting!"
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
Firebird Name Debate Enters a New Stage
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 711 comments
(Spill at 50!) | Index Only
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
(1)
|
2
(1)
|
2
Re:The new name (Score:4, Funny)
(Last Journal: Friday May 20 2005, @03:19PM)
IMHExperience, everything named Stingray was cool, and Phoenix was definitely worthy of such a name. Firebird is a pretty weak allusion to Phoenix.
Re:The new name (Score:4, Insightful)
Below is the email I sent, outlining three points:
Re:The new name (Score:5, Informative)
(http://www.ling.upenn.edu/~kurisuto)
Prior to the 1976 revision of U.S. copyright law, you would actually lose your copyright to a work if you published it without proper copyright notice being displayed.
After 1976, you automatically obtain copyright on your work as soon as it is fixed in a tangible format. You own the copyright whether you add the copyright notice or not. Including the copyright notice is still a good idea, however, because it makes it easier to establish that someone _knowingly_ violated your copyright; it can affect the amount of damages you receive.
All of this stuff is in the circulars which the U.S. Copyright office makes available on the web.
Re:The new name (Score:4, Informative)
Re:The new name (Score:4, Informative)
(http://www.ling.upenn.edu/~kurisuto)
Firebird (the database project) was using the name prior to the use of the name by Mozilla. Because of prior use, the Firebird database project has certain legally enforceable trademark rights to the name "Firebird" even if they did not register the trademark and are not using the (tm) mark. For example, if someone else started using the name "Firebird" for a database-related product, they would almost certainly be infringing on the Firebird project's trademark.
The Mozilla project may or may not be infringing on the database project's trademark. The crucial legal question is whether web browsers and database products are sufficiently similar types of products that a reasonable layperson might be confused into thinking that there is a connection between the two.
This is one of those questions where the answer is not clear-cut and where I wouldn't want to bet a lot of money on a court ruling in either direction. Just to give one example of the complexity of the laws when it comes to this kind of interpretation, consider this. When a company with no connection with Kodak-Eastman marketed "Kodak" brand cigarette lighters, they were found to be in violation of Kodak-Eastman's trademark even though the products are of quite different types. In this case, it was because "Kodak" is an invented word; if the name had been "Imperial", the finding would have probably been different. The point is that there are a lot of things which the court has to take into consideration in a case of this type, and the outcome of litigation in this case regarding the name "Firebird" would not be certain.
I got a name for em! (Score:5, Funny)
smile, you'll live longer.
No, (Score:5, Funny)
Are you sure you weren't searching English-only?
Re:I got a name for em! (Score:5, Funny)
Phallus? (Score:5, Funny)
(http://www.stanleysy.com/)
I hope.
Phallus was already suggested (Score:5, Funny)
In fact, it's already been suggested: Most People Agree: Phallus is a Really Bad Name for a Browser [mozillazine.org] 8-)
Re:Phallus? (Score:5, Funny)
(http://www.whydomytitsitch.com/)
Bummeroskies, Dude. The folks at slashdot have eliminated my ability to use a style="" in my <div>.
"Interesting" My Foot (Score:4, Insightful)
This is the same crowd that gets excited when corporations try to take domain names from people who have had them for years. Using this same logic, shouldn't Mozilla switch their name since FirebirdSQL used it first? Prior art and all...
This kind of petty (it's just a name), inmature (flooding people's e-mail), public arguing is one of the reasons Linux isn't getting the acceptance it should.
Re:"Interesting" My Foot (Score:5, Interesting)
(http://www.aktiom.net/)
Maybe their methods aren't the greatest, but this is a good chance for them to raise awareness. The project should get more attention anyways, it's up there with Postgres (or maybe better) as a high-quality enterprise database (formerly SAP DB).
Re:"Interesting" My Foot (Score:5, Informative)
(http://iki.fi/jni/ | Last Journal: Thursday November 27 2003, @05:14AM)
Yeah, a very good point. The sourceforge usage statistics [sourceforge.net] for the Firebird project demonstrate this very well.
Re:"Interesting" My Foot (Score:4, Informative)
(Last Journal: Sunday May 20 2007, @11:56AM)
The month-by-month [sourceforge.net] statistics show that this is a large project, very much active and rather popular. How else would you explain the steady 30,000+ downloads a month for the last 18 months?
This doesn't beat Mozilla's download stats but keep in mind that this is a database, not a browser.
Overall, this respectable OpenSource project should be given much more credit than what it is getting right now.
Re:"Interesting" My Foot (Score:4, Funny)
(http://tim.timriordan.com/)
Ok I admint it it was me I donwloaded it 28,763 times I dont know what the other 1,237 times were. I had nothing to do and I just my my BB connection in, sorry for screwing up the usage stats..
Shot themselves in the Foot (Score:4, Insightful)
(http://privon.com/)
This could also be just a smart move by the FirebirdSQL team.
Well, that depends... I for one have no intention of using a program where the developers and supporters resort to spamming and flooding other projects with derogatory comments. It shows a great level of immaturity. Therefore, I have no interest in using FirebirdSQL. I'd never heard of it before, but the only things I've heard about it so far are that the developers and supporters are basically jerks, flooding places with messages as opposed to openning up a positive, constructive dialog to resolve the differences.
IMHO, they've shot themselves in the foot.
neurostarRe:Shot themselves in the Foot (Score:5, Informative)
Firebird DB draws its codebase from Borland's InterBase. Borland was going to kill InterBase and let many of their developers go. Those developers decided to resurrect InterBase as an open source product. There was a lot of talk and Borland was going to release the full source code and rights to them so that this could happen. Then, the talks broke down and InterBase Corporation got screwed. InterBase became a commercial product again with substantially higher licensing fees than before.
So, they (IBC) took what source they DID have rights to and expanded the product and offer it as an OS solution. Because it essentially arose from the ashes, it was named Firebird (and the IBPhoenix support group was born).
Firebird is a very robust and powerful SQL 92 compliant database. It's adoptance by the OS community has been slow because most people remember it only as the commercial InterBase product. But, it's a very powerful, cross platform, database solution. I've used both InterBase and FireBird in my work I'm predominantly a Delphi developer..but do a fair amount of Linux work on the side). InterBase licensing costs are high. FireBird is free.
I suggest that you take a look at what Firebird (the DB) has to offer. I think you'll be pleasantly suprised. And, now that you have an understanding of where the name came from for the project, maybe you'll have a better appreciation of their fight to retain it.
RD
Re:"Interesting" My Foot (Score:5, Interesting)
I'm not sure the "any publicity is good publicity" mantra applies when you're talking about an informed and critical forum like /. though. Just ask Microsoft how many new users they've acquired through their publicity here -- and they even get their own icon... ;-)
Re:"Interesting" My Foot (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:"Interesting" My Foot (Score:5, Insightful)
No need to register trademarks -- and other info (Score:4, Informative)
(http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~tom7/ | Last Journal: Monday January 07 2002, @01:07AM)
However, you do need to defend a trademark (or else it can lose protection by becoming a generic term, like "kleenex"). To do this, they'd need to convince a court that there is likelihood for confusion among relevant consumers (are there any?) -- that a consumer might believe that the Firebird browser and the Firebird SQL engine come from the same place, or are somehow associated. Since they are both pieces of computer software, it's possible that a court would find them confusingly similar. (There is an actual list of types of trade for which you can register a trademark. I think you can get this from the PTO online. It's unlikely that "web browser" and "database" are on there!)
Re:"Interesting" My Foot (Score:5, Insightful)
Why do people feel the need to drag Linux into every OSS related spectacle?
This issue has absolutely nothing to do with Linux. Stop trying to drag every OSS project under one big Linux umbrella.
(P.S. For everyone reading please don't reply regarding the acceptance of Linux and Mod this obvoius troll down.)
Re:"Interesting" My Foot (Score:5, Insightful)
(http://anklebiter.net/)
This issue has absolutely nothing to do with Linux. Stop trying to drag every OSS project under one big Linux umbrella.
Well, if you're involved in the OSS community, then you know this has nothing to do with linux. But for any manager that might get wind of this *discussion*, they WILL associate it with linux. For most people outside the tech industry, OSS == linux. This will give OSS and linux a bit of a bad of name if the pointy-haired types read about it.
Shock and Awe? (Score:5, Insightful)
Jason
ProfQuotes [profquotes.com]
Re:Shock and Awe? (Score:5, Funny)
(http://www.digitalmyth.net/)
One Man's Opinion (Score:4, Insightful)
I think it would be nice to show some respect to another open source project which precedes yours. I am sure that if the database guys called their product MozillaDatabase, the Mozilla team wouldn't be very happy, and I am sure there would be an outcry on Slashdot. Or better yet, how about Microsoft changes one of their product to the name Phoenix. How about instead of MSN Messenger they call it MSN Firebird? Would everyone here tell the Firebird/Moz team to "quit crying"?
I guess the summary is, just play nice with others and change the name out of courtesy for others.
Ok, here's the thing (Score:5, Insightful)
Now, the real thing is that people need to stop getting to damn defensive over names. The browser Phoenix had a legitimate beef, I mean you have two browsers of the same name. That is really confusing. However the SQL Firebird people need to sit down and shut up.
Firebird is NOT an orignal name by any strech of the imagination. I can easily name one Firebird that predates both of them: the Pontiac Firebird (a car). When you pick a popular name, you need to be prepared for other people to use it as well. Also, if you aren't the first to use it, you certianly have no right ot bitch when someone else picks it up as well.
Like I said, the Phoenix browser had a legit complaint. Here you had two of the same kind of product named the same thing. I can gaurentee GMC would raise hell if Chrysler introduced the Dodge Firebird car. However they won't mind about either the database or browser, as they are clearly different products.
Hell, the same is true of Phoenix. In additon to being a mythical bird, it is also the name of the captial city of the state Arizona. I bet if you talk to most people and ask what they associate Phoenix with, it will be the mythical bird or the city, not the browser. It is not an orignal name and the city of Phoenix will not be screaming at the browser to change its name as most people can tell the difference.
Unless you have a truly orignal name you really can't whine about people in unrelated fields using it too. After all, you borrowed it from somewhere else. Even if you do think up an orignal name (which Firebird is not) you still can't really complain if someone with an unrelated product uses it. After all, what is the harm? No one will confuse the two since they are different.
However, so long as there are other, older Firebirds than the database, these people are just being whiny with no good reason.
Re:One Man's Opinion (Score:5, Informative)
Also, considering the Firebird Database is an open source project, I doubt they would be able/willing to bring up a lawsuit for the name anyhow.
Cutesy names are retarded. (Score:3, Funny)
(http://www.nsa.org/)
Why complain this way? (Score:4, Interesting)
(http://www.tolldog.com/ | Last Journal: Saturday November 01 2003, @10:53PM)
Do they think that annoying some group of people will make it better? If I were the mozilla group I would have issues with giving in. Brute force does not mean its right.
A database and a browser are not the same. There would not be any confusion. There has to be a better way to handle this.
I think I would be less likely to use or work on the database project now... all because on how they reacted.
Re:Why complain this way? (Score:4, Insightful)
Do you live on the same planet I do? Here on Terra the reaction of adults is wholely unpredictable. Myself included. Of course a database and a browser are the same. Let us send our nasty Terran rage mail in peace please.
Re:Why complain this way? (Score:4, Insightful)
(http://ninenine.com/)
No, this is how zealots react. This kind of silly, childish bullshit is exactly why people have such a hard time even considering Open Source anything.
I see it as Mozilla.org's duty (Score:5, Funny)
(http://www.dangpow.com/~sevn | Last Journal: Tuesday April 01 2003, @07:18PM)
keep the name to spite them now. It might not be
a bad idea to write some sort of redirection or
"pitty party" filter code that rewrites the
offending morons websites like Opera did with
MSN.
Non-story (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Non-story (Score:5, Insightful)
(http://xar.us/)
firebirdsql-1.0.2-908
That's confusing?
Re:Non-story (Score:5, Insightful)
And don't tell me that the name-choosers were unaware of the SQL project. It took them, what, four months to pick this name? Or was it five? Five and a half? And in all that time, these inveterate computer geeks never even typed the word into Google? [google.com] (As of this writing, the FirebirdSQL project still tops the list of results for that search.)
It's not as though there's no precedent for two OSS projects to share a name. Look at Gentoo the Linux distro [gentoo.org] and Gentoo the file manager. [obsession.se] At the very bottom of that second link you'll find a little note from the developer of the file manager saying "Gentoo the Linux distribution has nothing to do with gentoo the file manager, except the latter runs on the former. I actually used the name first, way back in September 1998. I've been in touch with the Gentoo folks, and we're cool."
So, ultimately, the parent post is only partially right: the legality of this move is a non-story. The story lies in the fact that the name change was made in an impolite way, apparently without any attempt to contact the FirebirdSQL group at all. Would it really have been so hard to have sent that email? They could even have exchanged reciprocal links, so that anybody who did get confused would easily be set straight. In the initial announcement [mozillazine.org] of the name on the MozillaZine forums, Asa Dotzler (sp?) wrapped up with the words "Hopefully this will be the end of naming legal issues for a while." Well, he got his wish -- about the legal part, anyway.
Re:Non-story (Score:5, Interesting)
(Last Journal: Monday February 27 2006, @09:54PM)
That's how things should be. I wish Gentoo-as-file-manager's author would go smack some sense into Firebird-as-database's whiny users/developers. Of course I also wish it didn't take a pack of lawyers to pick a name for your fucking software.
Re:Non-story (Score:4, Interesting)
(http://richardstanford.com/ | Last Journal: Monday April 05 2004, @06:03PM)
Or do you really believe that more people are associating the name Firebird with this database (for the record, I didn't know about their name change to Firebird, and I'm a professional DBA) than they are with the Pontiac muscle car? I would be willing to bet that they were much further down the list before this came out.
Anyway, did the Firebird team consult with, let's see, Firebird Web Design [firebird.net]? Or Financial Firebird [financialfirebird.com]? Or any number of other software projects using the name Firebird?
My opinion? Its their fault for using a generic name. Microsoft's product isn't called Windows, its "Microsoft Windows". Why isn't the database Firebird called "Firebird SQL" (for example)? And the browser "Mozilla Firebird" (hmm.. bulky..). Nobody has exclusive rights to the name Firebird, no matter who came first.
"With my last breath, I stab at thee" (Score:5, Insightful)
Sounds similiar to tactics we hear around here, when it's a company or person we don't agree with. How many times have we heard "everyone E-mail them" or we're going to "/." their site?
Sounds like bad karma coming home to roost.
Just going to have to make up a word (Score:3, Insightful)
(http://www.erelas.com/)
Re:Just going to have to make up a word (Score:4, Insightful)
Its not a legal matter as far as I'm concerned. Comes down to fact that AOL staff didn't have the imagination to think up a name of their own. So they took one that they know they can stomp all over and make it theirs.
Is this the respect different OSS projects show each other, or only when they are actually heartless multinationals is disguise.
It's a moot point. (Score:4, Insightful)
(http://asuaf.org/~munki/)
HotWings (Score:5, Funny)
In keeping with the Fiery Bird Motif of Firebird and Phoenix (a mythical bird that bursts into flame and is reborn)...
May I suggest that they change the name to "HotWings" to avoid futher disputes. Has a nice ring to it, eh?
This is very childish. (Score:3, Insightful)
How about Bennu? (Score:5, Interesting)
(http://www.dancingmonkey.org/ | Last Journal: Thursday May 08 2003, @07:44PM)
I propose:
Bennu - Heron-like Phoenix of Egyptian mythology. It arose from the flames of Heliopolis and was worshipped as the soul of Orisis incarnate.
http://members.tripod.com/~Ertosi/Folklore/Myth
Re:How about Bennu? (Score:5, Interesting)
I mean, yeah, when you're explaining what it means to your uncultured IE-using colleagues, you'd get to use phrases like "flames of Heliopolis" and "soul of Orisis (sic)"... but they're just going to go, "Benoo, huh? Ah think ah'll jez stick with me Explorer, or mebbe see what all the fuzz about this Firebird thingy wot I heard about is, it sounds tootin'-good. You can keep yer Benoo, college-boy."
I propose moving away from the flaming-bird theme if it'll make getting a cooler name possible. Minotaur, maybe, or Gorgon, or even a non-creature, like Odysseus or something. Hey, there's an idea: Odysseus was a navigator of sorts, wasn't he?
Open Source Psychology (Score:3, Insightful)
One of the terms that often gets thrown around when discussing open source software is the "Open Source Community", and I suspect that one of the most important features of this community is the recognition that is accorded to developers, so project names take on a special significance in the OSS community, almost paralleling their significance in the world of commercial software. In the world of commercial software names are important for marketing purposes, while in the open source world, project names are important because of the cachet value that having your name associated with a project brings. So just as a commercial product named x would suffer adverse effects if a dominant company were to name their product x, so does Firebird-the-database when the second-or-third most successful OSS project (behind the Linux kernel and maybe apache) decides to take the name Firebird-the-browser.
Having said that, this all seems pretty silly, and it occurs to me that mass mailing campaigns aren't the mature way to deal with this, even if egos are involved. If this were a commercial situation (if the lawyers weren't involved) a mutually beneficial solution would be negotiated between the grown-ups running the two projects. It seems to me that this is the best course of action in this case as well.
-----
posted while drunk-as-in-bourbon.
Sheer Pointlessness (Score:4, Insightful)
(http://www.udic.org/)
Unfortunately, this sort of thing happens all the time in the business world. >_< The new thing, though, was the e-mail campaign - seems a tad childish because it needlessly makes it more difficult for the developers to keep up with other mail. The least they could've done was simply meet with eachother cordially.
Just name it like all unix executables (Score:5, Funny)
(Last Journal: Tuesday December 14 2004, @04:42PM)
Are we missing the point? (Score:4, Insightful)
Interbase became Firebird appreciates just how
wretched and bloody and ugly the final months
were before it became open source. There were
folks fighting tooth and nail to give this
incredible product a fighting chance, and I have
nothing but respect for what they have achieved.
If you spend a couple of hours really, seriously
researching what this product offers, you'll
not only wonder how Borland could mismanage it
as badly as they did, but also wonder why MySQL
and PostgreSQL get so much press without being
mentioned as an afterthought. If only a tenth
of the resources were placed into Firebird as
are placed into PostgreSQL, I seriously wonder
if PostgreSQL wouldn't be largely abandoned
within the next two years.
This is a story about a beat up and exhausted
small group of core supporters coming up with a
name, and then, a year and some months later,
just as they're really starting to get the code
base they inherited under control and figured
out, a much bigger and well known crew picks
that same name. It isn't that the Mozilla team
couldn't keep the Firebird name - it's that they
shouldn't. It isn't that anyone will confuse
a web browser with a RDBMS, it's that it's a
completely unnecessary risk that anyone could.
It's about essential respect in the open source
community. The Mozilla crew could win this
argument, partly based on sheer inertia, partly
based on beleaguered opponents mounting an
ineffectual fight, and partly based on the
relative resources.
But they shouldn't. And to anyone who spends any
time at all researching the issue, the Mozilla
group is clearly engaging in "friendly fire."
I deeply respect both of these projects. It's
time for both sides to raise the bar on what it
means to fight for a common cause.
Baudtender
Re: Are we missing the point? (Score:5, Insightful)
(http://off.net/~shaver/diary/)
From what little I know about the FirebirdSQL database, I have tremendous respect for their technical accomplishments, and the work they did to get their project off the ground.
I do not have any respect at all left for their methods in dealing with conflict. There are a lot of people trying to guess what mozilla.org did or did not do in the search for a new name for Phoenix, and how mozilla.org will or will not use the name "Firebird". These are speculations that don't need to happen, since simply asking politely would have had the questions answered. Instead, the FirebirdSQL crew assumed malice and and "dirty deeds" and went straight from "hey, they're using the name Firebird as well" to "they're evil and we must mailbomb them into the ground, so that they see that we deserve the name more".
I'm not involved in the day-to-day operation of Mozilla anymore, and I've been under email siege for days now. When this whole thing started, I was sympathetic to their emotional reaction, and interested in finding ways to mitigate the (incredibly small) chance of user confusion. Now, I don't want to have anything to do with the Firebird people at all, I no longer care much for their feelings, and I'm very unlikely to expend more effort in trying to reach some sort of outcome that makes them happy. Maybe that was their intent, but maybe I'm starting to understand why their dealings with Borland were so troublesome.
(That they've had historic problems with names and legal issues and whatever other hell they, like any other large project, have endured might explain some of their IMO immature, self-damaging, offensive behaviour, but it sure doesn't excuse it.)
Actually, the very first thing I did when I heard about the conflict was head to Google, where I found that searching for firebird [google.com] turned up a pile of projects and products, firebird software [google.com] was just as crowded, and firebird internet [google.com] completed the trifecta of shared-namespace results. So my take was, and largely still is, that there's a community of projects using the name "Firebird", including many in the software and internet spaces, and that we would be N + 1 to their happy N. Nobody has yet made a convincing argument to me that it can't be the case, nor that FirebirdSQL's million-plus users and developers will disappear because FirebirdSQL is no longer the largest project using the name-part. And believe me, I've heard a lot of argument on this topic.
If a name change is made -- which I find to be unlikely, and which makes the "only a name change will satisfy us" position of the FirebirdSQL people somewhat unfortunate -- I hope it's to "butt-head database" [venona.com].
I am not speaking for mozilla.org here, in case that wasn't clear. I just think that the FirebirdSQL people could have done themselves a lot of good by approaching mozilla.org politely and explaining their concerns, before bitching to the press and inciting mail and forum-bombings, replete with ad hominem nonsense. At the least, they've lost themselves whatever meagre contribution I could have made to a peaceful resolution.
MikeDinosaur (Score:3, Interesting)
Mozilla Allosaurs Mail
Mozilla Stegosaurus Web Browser
Mozilla Coelophysis Usenet client
If not, then maybe stick to the lizard theme (i.e. Gecko):
Mozilla Chameleon?
Mozilla Iguana?
Mozilla Salamander?
Etcetera.
I have a question... (Score:5, Insightful)
(Last Journal: Friday December 06 2002, @12:24PM)
Just a thought.
New name idea... (Score:5, Funny)
(Last Journal: Friday December 06 2002, @12:24PM)
Example
"My browser just crashed."
or
"I can't check my email."
Re:New name idea... (Score:5, Funny)
(http://slashdot.org/~panaceaa | Last Journal: Friday July 14 2006, @09:19PM)
Example
"The Internet isn't working."
That's what everyone calls their computers anyway...
Why bother to take another projects name? (Score:5, Interesting)
I would ask them to consider how they would feel if Microsoft decided to rename Powerpoint as Microsoft Mozilla - in their (mozilla's) legal teams opinion it would cause no confusion?
Yes, Ok we could have chosen better as well, Firebird is but our mistake is three years ago and we didn't have the financial means to get any legal advice (still don't really). It was a name chosen by a few enthusiasts, after checking round the web that it wasn't going to conflict with anyone. From the lack of complaints over the last three years, I guess we haven't stepped on anyones toes.
But with mozilla we will overlap, some examples of confusing areas:
1. I can see mozilla users ending up at firebird.sourceforge.net looking for information on mozilla-firebird.
2. I can see much confusion between news and list names : see
http://www.mozillazine.org/forums/index.php?c=4
vs:
http://www.firebirdsql.org/index.php?op=lis
After a year of two of posts to these, that will seriously muck up google searches for "firebird" and "download" for instance, as well as firebird (and moz) getting user requests for browers/databases in both our general newslists.
3. I can see package confusion occuring on most linux distributions - install which firebird rpm?
4. Security releases for "Firebird" are likely to overlapping on searches by product name.
5. My (limited) exposure to legal issues, was that just being another software product is cause enough to create user confusion. So Im supprised at their legal advice (but am not a lawyer).
6. Web applications often include browsers and databases. Scripting languages often support both , so what will something like PHP with Firebird support mean. My feeling is after a year, noone will remember it was a database.
7. I don't want to spend the rest of my life explaining to people that Firebird (our project) is not a web browser.
So you've got to ask why cause all the confusion (most of which I fear will be suffered by our users and developers), when it can be simply fixed by Mozilla choosing another name that doesn't conflict with an existing project.
I find this especially strange when coming from one name clash, they decided to go into another, with all that "months of legal help" surely they can come up with their own unique name.
And yes I am involved with the firebird project and the firebirdsql foundation. Where a lot of people work very hard on a Firebird for zero dollars in return.
Regards
Mark O'Donohue
--
See you at the First European Firebird Conference in May in Fulda, Germany
http://www.firebird-conference.com
(since I've had a few pointy notes, that Im only doing all this for the publicity, [Im not personally I feel quite sick in the stomach about this whole episode] I thought I'd include my normal
Re:Why bother to take another projects name? (Score:4, Insightful)
FWIW, I'd say that the the folks causing the collision should be backing up and apologising. Mozilla Firebird hasn't had very long to become entrenched in the public awareness and it wouldn't be too great a hardship for them to suck it up and switch again. There have been plenty of good suggestions made here. Is Mozilla Firebird so radically different that it couldn't be called Mozilla2.0??
flame on!
Shoulda named it "The" (Score:3, Funny)
(http://slashdot.org/)
Call it Quetzl... (Score:3)
(http://burningwell.org/)
Question... (Score:5, Interesting)
(http://www.redbearnet.com/)
There's a little joke there for those "in the know", but it's really not a joke. The problem is that you *do* have to be "in the know". About a third of the people reading this post probably didn't realize there was supposed to *be* a joke there. I'll bet even a bunch of the "in the know" folks missed it. Didn't you?
That's because the names Firebird and Thunderbird are absolutely meaningless to most of us. There's no context. There's a reason the Firebird relational database is called FirebirdSQL most of the time, to help give it some context. Somebody on that team realized that Firebird all by itself wouldn't necessarily mean anything to anyone, until or unless it was built into a big name with tons of publicity.
If the Firebird/Thunderbird/Mozilla/Phoenix people actually want real humans to learn about and use their software, they really need to come up with some better, more relevant, more original names. Otherwise only the geek community is going to know what the hell we're talking about whenever we mention those products. There are still very few people who have even heard of Mozilla outside the geek realm. It shouldn't take a government study to realize that part of the problem is the cute, meaningless name. Every time I mention Mozilla I have to explain that it's a web browser. I shouldn't have to explain that it's a web browser, but only that it's a *good* web browser. Something about the name should already have told them, at least partially, that it was a web browser.
"Internet Explorer" may not be cute, but by gosh nobody is going to be confused about what a product with that name is supposed to do. I'm really kind of flabbergasted that the Mozilla community can't come up with something, after months of discussion, that's better than Firebird/Thunderbird. Two mythological names that tell me absolutely nothing about the software they refer to, and furthermore are so similar that it will be difficult even for us geeks to remember which part they refer to. "Now, does fire remind me more of the Internet, or of e-mail? Hmm..."
C'mon people. Surely the whole community can come up with something inbetween these useless "cute" names and the mundane dry clearness of the "explorer" and "navigator" names, and have something that's original, informative and catchy enough for non-geeks to use without feeling ridiculous. I mean, good God, OpenEmail and OpenBrowser would be better than what they've come up with.
Here's hoping the right people will read this, have the same thoughts and run with it...
Synonyms (Score:3, Funny)
Suggestive naming... (Score:3)
(http://www.gnustep.org/)
behaving like adults (Score:5, Interesting)
if you'd like to see how sensible people handle this sort of thing, check out the two gentoo's:
http://www.obsession.se/gentoo/ [obsession.se]
http://www.gentoo.org/ [gentoo.org]
looks like so many problems would be solved if people just had some better manners.
Lousy attitudes. (Score:4, Insightful)
Our marks are not there for the taking and our advice is that the law is on our side: we have nearly three years of widespread international use of our mark.
What incredible arrogance to claim ownership of the word "Firebird" implied by the statement "Our marks are not there for the taking." Give me a break. That word wasn't theirs to begin with.
Plus, while they don't come right out and say that they'd threaten legal action, they're certainly hinting at it by claiming they believe the law is on their side. Of course, that's a bullshit scare tactic at best, and a weak one at that.
This is childish whining in every sense.
I agree... (Score:5, Funny)
(http://apocalyptech.com/ | Last Journal: Monday January 19 2004, @03:06PM)
The easy solution! Everyone wins. (Score:4, Insightful)
(http://knoppixquake.webhop.net/)
Firebird SQL gets more visibility, Mozilla clears up any potential confusion (?). They both get to keep their project names.
Why does everything need to be such a big deal? Can anyone come up with a good idea why this won't work?
And we wonder... (Score:3, Funny)
(http://slashdot.org/ | Last Journal: Thursday July 29 2004, @08:47AM)
Its obvious, Prince did it (Score:3, Funny)
We just need to give the browser a symbol from some obscure font, and start referring to is as "The Browser formally known as Phoenix"
What am I missing here? (Score:5, Insightful)
The issue appears to be what to call the stand-alone Mozilla browser. Why not call it simply...
MOZILLA BROWSER?
It's very clear what the product is, conflicts with nobody, and ends all this wasteful bickering. The solution is so frikking simple though that I MUST be missing something.
The Phoenix Browser People are UNCOOL (Score:3, Informative)
(http://bioinformatics.ucsf.edu/bwtaylor)
Frankly, if Phoenix-Firebird does not reverse course, this is going to get very ugly. I would suspect that the fallout will severely damage both projects. The open source community needs to not allow this to happen. Phoenix-Firebird created this mess and ONLY they can get out of it. The open source community needs to pressure them to not continue down the road to conflict and discord.
Okay, this is now getting *OLD*. (Score:4, Insightful)
(http://mistersanity.blogspot.com/ | Last Journal: Tuesday May 29 2007, @04:42PM)
Then it was Communicator, which contained Navigator and was produced
by Netscape. Then it was Mozilla again. Then it was SeaMonkey.
Then it was Mozilla again. Then they decided to split it up into
Phoenix, Minotaur, and so forth. Then they renamed them to Firebird,
Thunderbird, and who knows what. Now the name Firebird is in
dispute... *ENOUGH*. No more name changes. Just call it "the
Mozilla.org browser", "the Mozilla.org mailreader", and so on, and
that'll be fine.
Both sides are in the wrong (Score:3, Informative)
OK, after reading throught he morass of crap that people have posted, it seems that people fall into a few different camps.
Camp 1 is "Screw FirebirdSQL, they're a bunch of nutbars." An offshoot of Camp 1 is "Screw FirebirdSQL, they're a bunch of children and don't merit a response."
Camp 2 is "Screw FirebirdSQL, they don't have trademark/copyright/a legal leg to stand on."
Camp 3 is "Screw Mozilla, they're a bunch of nutbars."
And Camp 4 is "Jesus Christ, everyone is a bunch of friggin immature morons."
Personally, I'm of the opinion that, while it doesn't seem there is a legal leg here, the Mozilla team should have done the polite thing, and not even named the new browser Firebird. Someone pointed out "What would happen if MS renamed Powerpoint to Microsoft Mozilla?" Everyone would decry MS as being an evil monopolist corporation.. Wait, that already happens. Anyways, everyone would be flaming Microsoft up one side and down the other. The only difference in this situation is that Microsoft would ignore all of the flame and move on, while the Mozilla people seem not to be.
How is this any different? You have a group of opensource developers (The FirebirdSQL people) who feel that they've been wronged (Legitimately, in my mind. And yes I realize it might be legal, that doesn't mean it's right).
I looked at the "slightly immature request" on the ibphoenix website, and you know what it amounted to? It is almost exactly what anyone around here posts when you say "Mail your congressman!" My God, no!!! Did you realize that you are being "slightly immature" when you "participate in mass posting campaigns" to your congressman? Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't a forum to
Another point is that Sourceforge already has a project named Firebird (The aforementioned FirebirdSQL). Curiously, Mozilla seems to appear on Sourceforge as well. Don't you think the Mozilla people might want to avoid problems on Sourceforge, if nowhere else? Generic names aside, Firebird is a registered project, and has been.
And, what will happen if (when?) AOL Legal decides to get a bug up its ass and sue FirebirdSQL for some name infringement? Will we say then "Tough, FirebirdSQL, you shouldn't have chosen a generic name" while forgetting that they had that name long before Mozilla Firebird?
This situation is making me sick. Mozilla has acted like a bunch of children, with their only defense being "Well, it's legal" while forgetting the question "Is it right?" No, it isn't right, and I think the Mozilla folks should be changing the name from Firebird to something that is at least unique (and non confusing, so we don't get Mozilla FyreByrd) on Sourceforge, if nowhere else.
Re:They are 100% right. (Score:5, Informative)
(http://slashdot.org/)
The same is not true of the Firebird SQL software. They are in differant spaces and in my opinion are not likely to be confused. The IBPhoenix guy also handled the situation poorly and doesn't merit a response.
"FirebirdSQL" and "Mozilla Firebird" can coexist (Score:3, Interesting)
(http://www.anotherbear.com/ | Last Journal: Tuesday November 25 2003, @03:29PM)
Semi-generic names suffixed with "SQL" have already coexisted with other projects. For instance, there's a "MySQL", a "MyMP3", etc. So just call the database "FirebirdSQL" and the web browser "Mozilla Firebird". You don't see the maintainer of xstep [sourceforge.net] going apedung on the other xstep [thomasscott.net], do you?
Re:They should call it... (Score:3, Interesting)
(http://www.littleblur.com/ | Last Journal: Saturday November 24, @01:52PM)