www-legal-discuss mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Alan D. Cabrera" <l...@toolazydogs.com>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Change JSecurity's Name
Date Sun, 11 Jan 2009 22:53:56 GMT

On Jan 11, 2009, at 10:52 AM, Tim Veil wrote:

> I guess my take is that
> JSecurity has been in the name of this project for nearly 4 years  
> without compliant

Sorry, I'm not following.  Unless Juniper has held the name for three  
years or less, how is that relevant?

> JSecurity has name recognition and a following

Sorry, I don't understand if this is pertinent other than it being  
motivation for keeping the name.  I also am motivated to keep the name  
but I don't see how we can get past the issues below.

> The project of concern, "J-Security" is not a product at all but  
> rather a " resource for security information and analysis."
> J-Security's parent company Juniper is in the network hardware  
> business not the Java application business
> JSecurity is an open-source software project not a "product" we are  
> looking to sell (not a competitor in any way to Juniper)

It doesn't matter if we sell a product or not.  It's a name collision,  
albeit a potential collision.  If they chose to push out a product  
under that name we would be in trouble; if I am wrong here someone  
please tell me.

Now, if you told me that we held our name longer than Juniper held  
theirs then it would be a different story.

So to put it more succinctly, here are the criteria where I am happy  
to change my vote.  Any single one would work for me.

1) We held the name longer than Juniper - I'll take anyone's word on  
this
2) If Juniper came out with a product under their service offering we  
would have nothing to worry about - I will only take an informed opinion

I'm guessing that the others would change their vote as well.


Regards,
Alan

>
> On Jan 11, 2009, at 1:32 PM, Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
>
>> Here's my take and I'm not intransigent on this.  I'll use a bit of  
>> hyperbole to make my point.
>>
>> If some company who makes hand made woven baskets has had the name  
>> JSecurity there would be no problem.  If that company decides to   
>> market a program that trains people in basket weaving written in  
>> java there would be no problem.
>>
>> However, other computer security companies have an earlier claim to  
>> JSecurity.  If they decide the release a suite of java programs  
>> that performs security analysis then there's overlap.
>>
>> Why would we want to live in the grey area anyway?  Am I  
>> misunderstanding something?
>>
>> Regards,
>> Alan
>>
>>
>> On Jan 10, 2009, at 5:05 PM, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
>>
>>> Agreed.
>>>
>>> I don't really understand what problem is being solved here.
>>>
>>> geir
>>>
>>> On Jan 10, 2009, at 8:00 PM, Les Hazlewood wrote:
>>>
>>>> -1 to changing the name at this time.
>>>>
>>>> I know my vote isn't binding, but I just want a record of it. At  
>>>> the
>>>> moment, I think any potential causes of conflict, given that  
>>>> there are
>>>> NO trademark or patent conflicts, are dubious at best.
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>>
>>>> Les
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, Jan 2, 2009 at 7:06 PM, Craig L Russell <Craig.Russell@sun.com

>>>> > wrote:
>>>>> any more...
>>>>>
>>>>> ok, former board member. ;-)
>>>>>
>>>>> Craig
>>>>>
>>>>> On Jan 2, 2009, at 2:41 PM, Henri Yandell wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm not a board member. :)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Fri, Jan 2, 2009 at 11:27 AM, Craig L Russell <Craig.Russell@sun.com

>>>>>> >
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> -1 Do not change JSecurity's name
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> We had the discussion in early December on the legal mailing
 
>>>>>>> list and no
>>>>>>> issues were raised contrary to Henri's comments. Henri is the
 
>>>>>>> only board
>>>>>>> member who commented on the JSecurity name during the  
>>>>>>> discussion.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> We will have at least three more votes where additional issues
 
>>>>>>> regarding
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>> name can be brought up:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 1. The first release of JSecurity code from the incubator.
>>>>>>> 2. The graduation vote of JSecurity taken by the incubator PMC.
>>>>>>> 3. The acceptance of JSecurity by the Apache board after the
 
>>>>>>> incubator
>>>>>>> votes.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Craig
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Dear JSecurity Team,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> There has been lengthy debate without consensus as to whether
or
>>>>>>> JSecurity's
>>>>>>> name should be changed to something else.  So, there is need
 
>>>>>>> for a vote.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Please vote on changing JSecurity's name to something else. 
 
>>>>>>> This is ONLY
>>>>>>> a
>>>>>>> vote of if we should change the name, NOT what any alternate
 
>>>>>>> name might
>>>>>>> be.
>>>>>>> I'd like to leave this vote open for 7 days instead of the  
>>>>>>> usual 3 to
>>>>>>> account for time that people may not be able to respond due to
 
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>> holidays.  Of course we can close the vote early if all  
>>>>>>> binding votes are
>>>>>>> accounted for prior to the 7 day limit.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The vote is open for the next 7 days and only votes from the
 
>>>>>>> JSecurity
>>>>>>> development team are binding.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> [ ] +1 Change JSecurity's name
>>>>>>> [ ] -1 Do not change JSecurity's name
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Dec 2, 2008, at 1:06 PM, Henri Yandell wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Given that it's a name you've been using for 4 years, and
 
>>>>>>>> it's very
>>>>>>>> generic [jXxx being a common pattern in our space and  
>>>>>>>> Security being
>>>>>>>> very generic]; I'm inclined to keep the current name; though
 
>>>>>>>> by the
>>>>>>>> same reasoning, it's a weak name as "Apache JSecurity" isn't
 
>>>>>>>> very good
>>>>>>>> branding.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> My tuppence of opinion.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hen
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Mon, Dec 1, 2008 at 7:55 PM, Les Hazlewood <lhazlewood@apache.org

>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Hi ASF legal team,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I'm writing this email in hopes of getting your feedback
 
>>>>>>>>> concerning a
>>>>>>>>> discussion we've been having on the JSecurity email list
(an  
>>>>>>>>> Incubator
>>>>>>>>> project).
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> A few of our mentors have expressed concern that there
might  
>>>>>>>>> be a
>>>>>>>>> possible naming conflict with our project name (JSecurity)
 
>>>>>>>>> and some
>>>>>>>>> other references found through google and other search
 
>>>>>>>>> mechanisms.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I'd like to point out that the JSecurity name, as an
open  
>>>>>>>>> source
>>>>>>>>> project identity has been around for almost 4 years now,
 
>>>>>>>>> with zero
>>>>>>>>> contact from any external entity claiming conflict with
a  
>>>>>>>>> proprietary
>>>>>>>>> name or product.  I know this isn't legal criteria for
 
>>>>>>>>> determining if
>>>>>>>>> there is a name conflict, but I surface it only to put
some  
>>>>>>>>> context of
>>>>>>>>> why the original JSecurity developers (and our well-

>>>>>>>>> established
>>>>>>>>> communities) think we should keep the JSecurity name.
 There  
>>>>>>>>> might be
>>>>>>>>> older references to this name, unrelated to our project,
but  
>>>>>>>>> we don't
>>>>>>>>> know for certain if they would constitute a risk in the
name  
>>>>>>>>> overlap.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> We'd like some feedback as to if the project name should
be  
>>>>>>>>> changed or
>>>>>>>>> not.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Here is what one of our mentors summarized after doing
some  
>>>>>>>>> research:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> <snip>
>>>>>>>>> Now, looking a bit forward on google, here are some other
 
>>>>>>>>> references
>>>>>>>>> to JSecurity :
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> http://jwicglobal.com/Knowledge.htm
>>>>>>>>> <http://jwicglobal.com/Knowledge.htm>
>>>>>>>>> "WIC GLOBAL has developed a comprehensive Information
Security
>>>>>>>>> Assessment service called JSecurity. Our JSecurity experts
 
>>>>>>>>> will
>>>>>>>>> conduct a full information security risk assessment focusing
 
>>>>>>>>> on:"
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> http://www.juniper.net/security/ <http://www.juniper.net/security/

>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>> Seems like they have a service called  J-Security. Be
sure  
>>>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>>> Juniper has a legal service who might perfectly well
send  
>>>>>>>>> some nicely
>>>>>>>>> written "cease and desist" letter to the ASF about this
 
>>>>>>>>> name. Not sure
>>>>>>>>> that our legals want to deal with that ...
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> http://www.jegers.com/dnn/Products/JPortfolio/tabid/83/Default.aspx
>>>>>>>>> <http://www.jegers.com/dnn/Products/JPortfolio/tabid/83/Default.aspx

>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>> Another JSecurity... Seems to be around since 2/11/2005
(at  
>>>>>>>>> least)
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> http://www.powerlogic.com.br/powerportal/ecp/files.do?evento=download&urlArqPlc=fld_jc_produc_ing_web2.pdf
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> <http://www.powerlogic.com.br/powerportal/ecp/files.do?evento=download&urlArqPlc=fld_jc_produc_ing_web2.pdf

>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>> This company has a product named JSecurity. Since when
?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> As much as I like the JSecurity name, I also think that
we  
>>>>>>>>> are un
>>>>>>>>> potential jeopardy if we don't change its name. That's
the  
>>>>>>>>> main issue
>>>>>>>>> we have : we can't afford any kind of legal action when
we  
>>>>>>>>> already
>>>>>>>>> know that there are company out there which already use
this  
>>>>>>>>> name.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Anyway, I can be wrong, I'm just trying to gather as
much  
>>>>>>>>> information
>>>>>>>>> as possible. When you guys think you have set your mind
 
>>>>>>>>> about this
>>>>>>>>> name, you will have to go to legal@apache.org
>>>>>>>>> <mailto:legal@apache.org> with the selected name
(be it  
>>>>>>>>> JSecurity or
>>>>>>>>> any other) to double check that it's ok or not (IFAIK).
That  
>>>>>>>>> is one of
>>>>>>>>> the condition to exit from the incubator :
>>>>>>>>> "Check of project name for trademark issues "
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> (http://incubator.apache.org/incubation/Incubation_Policy.html#Minimum+Graduation+Requirements
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> <http://incubator.apache.org/incubation/Incubation_Policy.html#Minimum+Graduation+Requirements

>>>>>>>>> >).
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> </snip>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Thanks for your review and feedback!
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Best,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Les
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Dec 1, 2008 at 10:18 PM, Les Hazlewood <lhazlewood@apache.org

>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Adam,
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Thanks _very_ much for such a detailed and thoughtful
 
>>>>>>>>>> opinion.  I love
>>>>>>>>>> to see people who aren't necessarily code contributors
 
>>>>>>>>>> contribute to
>>>>>>>>>> the project in other ways.  This is very valuable
to us.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I am in total agreement with your sentiments thus
far.  It  
>>>>>>>>>> is my
>>>>>>>>>> opinion that the name we have is great as it is and
I'd  
>>>>>>>>>> only like to
>>>>>>>>>> change the name if someone from legal puts pressure
on us  
>>>>>>>>>> to do so.
>>>>>>>>>> IANAL, so I'd have to trust their judgment.  I'm
going to  
>>>>>>>>>> post this to
>>>>>>>>>> legal in just a few minutes asking their feedback.
 I'd  
>>>>>>>>>> like to hear
>>>>>>>>>> what they say regardless of what we end up doing
- I'm  
>>>>>>>>>> genuinely
>>>>>>>>>> curious :)
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Thanks again very much for chiming in.  Its nice
to see  
>>>>>>>>>> that you (and
>>>>>>>>>> others) are taking continued interest in the project.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Les
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Dec 1, 2008 at 6:28 PM, adamtaft  
>>>>>>>>>> <adam@adamtaft.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I'm not really a contributor to the JSecurity
project yet  
>>>>>>>>>>> (though I
>>>>>>>>>>> hope to
>>>>>>>>>>> be in the future).  However, this thread has
caught my  
>>>>>>>>>>> attention, and
>>>>>>>>>>> so I
>>>>>>>>>>> thought I'd give a couple of thoughts.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I have an interest, call it a hobby, in name
related  
>>>>>>>>>>> issues for
>>>>>>>>>>> software
>>>>>>>>>>> projects, open source included.  So, though I
don't speak  
>>>>>>>>>>> from any
>>>>>>>>>>> official
>>>>>>>>>>> background (I guess beyond a little professional),
I would  
>>>>>>>>>>> like to
>>>>>>>>>>> point out
>>>>>>>>>>> a few things about the name Alcatraz.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> First, as I believe has been mentioned, the term
Alcatraz  
>>>>>>>>>>> has been
>>>>>>>>>>> associated with other software products already.
 So, this  
>>>>>>>>>>> is bad
>>>>>>>>>>> news
>>>>>>>>>>> with
>>>>>>>>>>> regards to trademark related issues.  Just because
its a  
>>>>>>>>>>> geographic
>>>>>>>>>>> location
>>>>>>>>>>> doesn't mean that it can't be trademarked.  Thus,
likely  
>>>>>>>>>>> these other
>>>>>>>>>>> software products are going to have problems
with any  
>>>>>>>>>>> related use of
>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>> term Alcatraz.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Second, the connotation for JSecurity implies
that the  
>>>>>>>>>>> product is
>>>>>>>>>>> used
>>>>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>>>> keep people out of the protected system.  This
is what the  
>>>>>>>>>>> term
>>>>>>>>>>> "security"
>>>>>>>>>>> implies, right?  Alcatraz is a prison.  It was
NOT meant  
>>>>>>>>>>> to keep
>>>>>>>>>>> people
>>>>>>>>>>> out,
>>>>>>>>>>> it was meant to keep people in.  The use is only
quasi- 
>>>>>>>>>>> related, and
>>>>>>>>>>> even
>>>>>>>>>>> confusing, for a product with your feature set.
 Alcatraz  
>>>>>>>>>>> software
>>>>>>>>>>> would be
>>>>>>>>>>> a better name for a product which keeps workstation/

>>>>>>>>>>> network users
>>>>>>>>>>> constrained in their internet use, like a firewall,
or a  
>>>>>>>>>>> web proxy,
>>>>>>>>>>> for
>>>>>>>>>>> example.  Or a child internet monitoring product.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Don't underestimate the importance of this point.
 The  
>>>>>>>>>>> name of a
>>>>>>>>>>> software
>>>>>>>>>>> should ideally be somewhat self describing, especially
 
>>>>>>>>>>> when starting
>>>>>>>>>>> out.
>>>>>>>>>>> Until the name becomes a core brand, having a
self  
>>>>>>>>>>> describing name
>>>>>>>>>>> can
>>>>>>>>>>> make
>>>>>>>>>>> a big difference.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Third, I don't think you can underestimate how
important  
>>>>>>>>>>> it is that
>>>>>>>>>>> people
>>>>>>>>>>> can search the name of your product and find
it through  
>>>>>>>>>>> Google (and
>>>>>>>>>>> friends).  Clearly the term Alcatraz has a huge
number of  
>>>>>>>>>>> unrelated
>>>>>>>>>>> hits,
>>>>>>>>>>> and you would clearly be lost any search engine
placement  
>>>>>>>>>>> with the
>>>>>>>>>>> name.
>>>>>>>>>>> Much better to have a name for your software
that is the  
>>>>>>>>>>> only known
>>>>>>>>>>> reference so that people can easily find you
after having  
>>>>>>>>>>> hear the
>>>>>>>>>>> name.
>>>>>>>>>>> This is why so many companies go crazy and conjure
 
>>>>>>>>>>> completely strange
>>>>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>>>> nonsensical product names.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Fourth, Alcatraz is a relatively difficult name
to spell,  
>>>>>>>>>>> which again
>>>>>>>>>>> becomes problematic for the above search recognition
 
>>>>>>>>>>> reasons.
>>>>>>>>>>> Alkitraz?
>>>>>>>>>>> Some people simply won't know how to spell it
immediately  
>>>>>>>>>>> (though
>>>>>>>>>>> this
>>>>>>>>>>> is a
>>>>>>>>>>> minor point, admittedly).
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Fifth, it seems like you're making preparations
for  
>>>>>>>>>>> something that
>>>>>>>>>>> you
>>>>>>>>>>> don't
>>>>>>>>>>> even know to be a problem.  Yes, the Apache legal
team  
>>>>>>>>>>> should be
>>>>>>>>>>> consulted.
>>>>>>>>>>> However, it seems like jumping the gun to just
start  
>>>>>>>>>>> changing package
>>>>>>>>>>> names
>>>>>>>>>>> with anticipation of a name change.  You would
be crazy to  
>>>>>>>>>>> start
>>>>>>>>>>> renaming
>>>>>>>>>>> packages based on some unknown possibility that
it has to  
>>>>>>>>>>> happen in
>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>> future.  What value does this add to the software?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Following the sigma-six and/or extreme programming
world  
>>>>>>>>>>> view, you
>>>>>>>>>>> shouldn't
>>>>>>>>>>> be making any change to your software until the
change is  
>>>>>>>>>>> actually
>>>>>>>>>>> required
>>>>>>>>>>> and value is added.  Do you have a pending lawsuit?
 Has  
>>>>>>>>>>> the Apache
>>>>>>>>>>> council
>>>>>>>>>>> suggested the change?  Are you being blocked
by the  
>>>>>>>>>>> incubation
>>>>>>>>>>> process?
>>>>>>>>>>> Why
>>>>>>>>>>> even consider a change until it needs to be done.
 Energy  
>>>>>>>>>>> could be
>>>>>>>>>>> better
>>>>>>>>>>> spent on other matters.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Yes, it's a trivial thing to refactor a project
from  
>>>>>>>>>>> Eclipse.  But,
>>>>>>>>>>> that's
>>>>>>>>>>> only a very small part of the bigger issue. 
Disruption,  
>>>>>>>>>>> confusion,
>>>>>>>>>>> support,
>>>>>>>>>>> search engine optimization, etc. are what needs
to be  
>>>>>>>>>>> thought about
>>>>>>>>>>> when
>>>>>>>>>>> changing the name.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Further, what if you decide to change the name
to  
>>>>>>>>>>> Alcatraz, and then
>>>>>>>>>>> get
>>>>>>>>>>> pressure from another software group?  Ouch,
time to  
>>>>>>>>>>> rename the
>>>>>>>>>>> project
>>>>>>>>>>> yet
>>>>>>>>>>> again.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I think you all are better just letting this
thing ride  
>>>>>>>>>>> until
>>>>>>>>>>> something
>>>>>>>>>>> real
>>>>>>>>>>> convicting suggests you need a change.  JSecurity
is a  
>>>>>>>>>>> great product
>>>>>>>>>>> name
>>>>>>>>>>> which you should stick with until otherwise needed.
 And,  
>>>>>>>>>>> if that day
>>>>>>>>>>> comes,
>>>>>>>>>>> Alcatraz is just simply the wrong name, in my
humble  
>>>>>>>>>>> opinion, for all
>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>> reasons mentioned above.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Adam
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Emmanuel Lecharny wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Nov 30, 2008, at 2:32 PM, Emmanuel
Lecharny wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Nov 26, 2008, at 9:51 AM,
Les Hazlewood wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 6:01
PM, Emmanuel Lecharny
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <elecharny@gmail.com>
wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Post to legal-discuss@a.o,
ask them, but give them  
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the names we
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have googled
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> too.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think this needs to be
vetted, so I'm happy to post  
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> legal-discuss.  But, I can't
easily find the thread  
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> googled
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> names.  Could you please
forward them on so I can  
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> post them to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> legal team?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Let me suggest this.  It seems
to me that that  
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> alcatraz is the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> clear
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> favorite, after jsecurity.  Let's
start setting up the  
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.0
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> packages
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to be alcatraz and when/if we
get the go-ahead from  
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> legal and the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Incubator PMC we can change the
packages to be  
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> jsecurity.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Well, I think then it's better to
stick with JSecurity  
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (because
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it's
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> already the name we use), ask to
Legal, and move to  
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> alcatraz if
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> needed (or any other name).
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So the first step, IMHO, is to ask
Legal about the  
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Jsecurity name
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (with all the infos we have already
found about it),  
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and also ask
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> them in the same mail if Alcatraz
is ok or not (same  
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> here : add
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> some
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> more infos related to this name,
assuming that being a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> geographical
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> location, it should not be such a
problem).
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Legal is not a clearing house for project
names.  They  
>>>>>>>>>>>>> can only
>>>>>>>>>>>>> give
>>>>>>>>>>>>> advice if there's a potential conflict,
i.e. JSecurity.   
>>>>>>>>>>>>> So far as
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I
>>>>>>>>>>>>> can tell, there is none for alcatraz.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> What I'm worried about is that the vetting
effort for  
>>>>>>>>>>>>> the JSecurity
>>>>>>>>>>>>> name will have the same track record
as the v0.9  
>>>>>>>>>>>>> release.  If we
>>>>>>>>>>>>> start
>>>>>>>>>>>>> with alcatraz then we have one less thing
impeding our  
>>>>>>>>>>>>> incubation
>>>>>>>>>>>>> process.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Let's start with Alcratraz then, and we have
quit some  
>>>>>>>>>>>> time to do
>>>>>>>>>>>> some
>>>>>>>>>>>> vetting before 1.0 (hopefully when the project
exits from
>>>>>>>>>>>> incubator).
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> So my +1 for alcatraz and +1 for doing the
renaming now.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>> cordialement, regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>> Emmanuel L├ęcharny
>>>>>>>>>>>> www.iktek.com
>>>>>>>>>>>> directory.apache.org
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>> View this message in context:
>>>>>>>>>>> http://n2.nabble.com/JSecurity%27s-new-name-tp1569003p1601248.html
>>>>>>>>>>> Sent from the JSecurity Developer mailing list
archive at  
>>>>>>>>>>> Nabble.com.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>> DISCLAIMER: Discussions on this list are informational and
 
>>>>>>>> educational
>>>>>>>> only.  Statements made on this list are not privileged, do
not
>>>>>>>> constitute legal advice, and do not necessarily reflect the
 
>>>>>>>> opinions
>>>>>>>> and policies of the ASF.  See <http://www.apache.org/licenses/

>>>>>>>> > for
>>>>>>>> official ASF policies and documents.
>>>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
>>>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Craig L Russell
>>>>>>> Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://db.apache.org/jdo
>>>>>>> 408 276-5638 mailto:Craig.Russell@sun.com
>>>>>>> P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
>>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Craig L Russell
>>>>> Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://db.apache.org/jdo
>>>>> 408 276-5638 mailto:Craig.Russell@sun.com
>>>>> P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org
>>>
>>>
>>
>


Mime
View raw message