Officially changing name to sourceware.org

Officially changing name to sourceware.org

[Christopher Faylor]

Does anyone have any strong objections to changing the name of this
system to 'sourceware.org' and referring to it in that way from now
own?

It's been brought to my attention that, as a visible system in the
redhat.com domain, any improprieties or incursions here would reflect
badly on Red Hat, so, IMO, the best solution to that is to change the
name.  Then if we are hacked and someone changes our web site to say
"You suck", no one will have to blame Red Hat for offending their
sensibilities.

I suppose that we'd need to keep the 'sources.redhat.com' name around
for the foreseeable future but, unless there are objections, I am going
to be replacing its use whereever I find it on the system.

cgf

Re: Officially changing name to sourceware.org

[Matthew Galgoci]

On Thu, 4 Dec 2003, Christopher Faylor wrote:

> Does anyone have any strong objections to changing the name of this
> system to 'sourceware.org' and referring to it in that way from now
> own?
> 
> It's been brought to my attention that, as a visible system in the
> redhat.com domain, any improprieties or incursions here would reflect
> badly on Red Hat, so, IMO, the best solution to that is to change the
> name.  Then if we are hacked and someone changes our web site to say
> "You suck", no one will have to blame Red Hat for offending their
> sensibilities.
> 
> I suppose that we'd need to keep the 'sources.redhat.com' name around
> for the foreseeable future but, unless there are objections, I am going
> to be replacing its use whereever I find it on the system.

Wasn't there some reason sourceware.org couldn't be used? Trademark or some
such? It doesn't really bother me one way or another if the name changes, but
I know there was some discussion about this back when it lived on a Red Hat
ip block. I'm not sure if the issue is even relevant anymore.

Could someone who remembers please enlignten me?

Thanks,

Matt

-- 
Matthew Galgoci
System Administrator
Red Hat, Inc
919.754.3700 x44155

Re: Officially changing name to sourceware.org

[Ian Lance Taylor]

Matthew Galgoci <mgalgoci@redhat.com> writes:

> Wasn't there some reason sourceware.org couldn't be used? Trademark or some
> such? It doesn't really bother me one way or another if the name changes, but
> I know there was some discussion about this back when it lived on a Red Hat
> ip block. I'm not sure if the issue is even relevant anymore.
> 
> Could someone who remembers please enlignten me?

SourceWare is a trademark of Pliant Technologies, which was purchased
by Market Central.

Look here for the SourceWare suite of products:
    http://www.marketcentral.com/crm_dat_sol/default.asp

We at Cygnus tried to trademark sourceware, but we couldn't, or maybe
we could and then we didn't keep it up.  Either way, Pliant picked it
up.

There is a different company which owns the domain name
sourceware.com: Datasource Software Corporation.

I own the domain name sourceware.org, and for some time now
sourceware.org has been an alias for sources.redhat.com.

Anyhow, we may not want to use sourceware for commercial purposes.
But I don't think it would be a big problem to use sourceware.org.

Ian

Re: Officially changing name to sourceware.org

[Jason Molenda]

Matthew Galgoci wrote:

> Wasn't there some reason sourceware.org couldn't be used? Trademark or some
> such? It doesn't really bother me one way or another if the name changes, but
> I know there was some discussion about this back when it lived on a Red Hat
> ip block. I'm not sure if the issue is even relevant anymore.
>      
> Could someone who remembers please enlignten me?

	http://sources.redhat.com/ml/overseers/1999/msg00195.html
	http://sources.redhat.com/ml/overseers/1999/msg00202.html

The company seems to still exist (or rather, they were acquired
by another company, Market Central):

	http://www.marketcentral.com/crm_dat_sol/default.asp

   Our SourceWare(r) System is a true cost-reduction solution. The
   SourceWare(r) System is based on Artificial Intelligence (AI),
   automated semantics processing, and neutral-form data management
   technology that is patented to deliver an unequalled level of
   automation and flexibility for ECM in a single, integrated
   software system. Our SourceWare(r) System has unique capabilities
   for reducing costs in four major ways.

It's interesting that searching for "sourceware" on google, I didn't
get a reference to Pliant until the 6th page of matches (and Pliant's
web site didn't show up until the 8th page).  There are several groups
using "Sourceware" around the web these days, e.g.

	http://www.sourcewareinc.com/
	http://www.sourceware.net/


I don't think it would be a problem for us to use the name "sourceware.org"
for the site.

Jason

Re: Officially changing name to sourceware.org

[law]

In message <m3ekvkxgqo.fsf@gossamer.airs.com>, Ian Lance Taylor writes:
 >Matthew Galgoci <mgalgoci@redhat.com> writes:
 >
 >> Wasn't there some reason sourceware.org couldn't be used? Trademark or some
 >> such? It doesn't really bother me one way or another if the name changes, b
 >ut
 >> I know there was some discussion about this back when it lived on a Red Hat
 >> ip block. I'm not sure if the issue is even relevant anymore.
 >> 
 >> Could someone who remembers please enlignten me?
 >
 >SourceWare is a trademark of Pliant Technologies, which was purchased
 >by Market Central.
 >
 >Look here for the SourceWare suite of products:
 >    http://www.marketcentral.com/crm_dat_sol/default.asp
 >
 >We at Cygnus tried to trademark sourceware, but we couldn't, or maybe
 >we could and then we didn't keep it up.  Either way, Pliant picked it
 >up.
 >
 >There is a different company which owns the domain name
 >sourceware.com: Datasource Software Corporation.
 >
 >I own the domain name sourceware.org, and for some time now
 >sourceware.org has been an alias for sources.redhat.com.
 >
 >Anyhow, we may not want to use sourceware for commercial purposes.
 >But I don't think it would be a big problem to use sourceware.org.
Is Pliant Technologies the company in Atlanta that was giving us
a hard time about the "sourceware" name?  IIRC they effectively 
demanded that we stop using the sourceware name, which eventually
led to sources.redhat.com.

jeff

Re: Officially changing name to sourceware.org

[Matthew Galgoci]

>  >There is a different company which owns the domain name
>  >sourceware.com: Datasource Software Corporation.
>  >
>  >I own the domain name sourceware.org, and for some time now
>  >sourceware.org has been an alias for sources.redhat.com.
>  >
>  >Anyhow, we may not want to use sourceware for commercial purposes.
>  >But I don't think it would be a big problem to use sourceware.org.
> Is Pliant Technologies the company in Atlanta that was giving us
> a hard time about the "sourceware" name?  IIRC they effectively 
> demanded that we stop using the sourceware name, which eventually
> led to sources.redhat.com.

pliant was purchased by  Market Central, Inc.

http://www.findarticles.com/cf_dls/m0EIN/2003_August_7/106394987/p1/article.jhtml

Perhaps someone should approach them and ask if for a legal document that would
give us the a-ok to use sourceware.org?

-- 
Matthew Galgoci
System Administrator
Red Hat, Inc
919.754.3700 x44155

Re: Officially changing name to sourceware.org

[Jason Molenda]

On Fri, Dec 05, 2003 at 06:40:17PM -0500, Matthew Galgoci wrote:

> Perhaps someone should approach them and ask if for a legal document that 
> would give us the a-ok to use sourceware.org?

I wouldn't.  The original company that sent us that letter was a 
newborn company with no actual product who had just bought the TM,
and we were the only other ones using the term.  Neither of these
are true today.

Jason

Re: Officially changing name to sourceware.org

[Matthew Galgoci]

On Fri, 5 Dec 2003, Jason Molenda wrote:

> On Fri, Dec 05, 2003 at 06:40:17PM -0500, Matthew Galgoci wrote:
> 
> > Perhaps someone should approach them and ask if for a legal document that 
> > would give us the a-ok to use sourceware.org?
> 
> I wouldn't.  The original company that sent us that letter was a 
> newborn company with no actual product who had just bought the TM,
> and we were the only other ones using the term.  Neither of these
> are true today.

I would because management has changed. Plus it couldn't hurt to ask.

-- 
Matthew Galgoci
System Administrator
Red Hat, Inc
919.754.3700 x44155

Re: Officially changing name to sourceware.org

[Jason Molenda]

On Fri, Dec 05, 2003 at 06:52:40PM -0500, Matthew Galgoci wrote:

> > I wouldn't.  The original company that sent us that letter was a 
> > newborn company with no actual product who had just bought the TM,
> > and we were the only other ones using the term.  Neither of these
> > are true today.
> 
> I would because management has changed. Plus it couldn't hurt to ask.


I disagree -- it could very much hurt to ask.

Given all the different people using "sourceware" on the net, it's
apparent that the new company is not actively enforcing their TM,
at least for people doing sites like this one.  Sending a letter is
just going to raise the visibility of the issue, and they'll either
say, "No way", or they won't know how to reply so they'll send it
to their lawyers who will say "No way".


Jason

Re: Officially changing name to sourceware.org

[Matthew Galgoci]

On Fri, 5 Dec 2003, Jason Molenda wrote:

> On Fri, Dec 05, 2003 at 06:52:40PM -0500, Matthew Galgoci wrote:
> 
> > > I wouldn't.  The original company that sent us that letter was a 
> > > newborn company with no actual product who had just bought the TM,
> > > and we were the only other ones using the term.  Neither of these
> > > are true today.
> > 
> > I would because management has changed. Plus it couldn't hurt to ask.
> 
> 
> I disagree -- it could very much hurt to ask.
> 
> Given all the different people using "sourceware" on the net, it's
> apparent that the new company is not actively enforcing their TM,
> at least for people doing sites like this one.  Sending a letter is
> just going to raise the visibility of the issue, and they'll either
> say, "No way", or they won't know how to reply so they'll send it
> to their lawyers who will say "No way".

You know you are probably right.

-- 
Matthew Galgoci
System Administrator
Red Hat, Inc
919.754.3700 x44155

Re: Officially changing name to sourceware.org

[Christopher Faylor]

On Fri, Dec 05, 2003 at 03:42:31PM -0800, Jason Molenda wrote:
>On Fri, Dec 05, 2003 at 06:40:17PM -0500, Matthew Galgoci wrote:
>>Perhaps someone should approach them and ask if for a legal document
>>that would give us the a-ok to use sourceware.org?
>
>I wouldn't.  The original company that sent us that letter was a
>newborn company with no actual product who had just bought the TM, and
>we were the only other ones using the term.  Neither of these are true
>today.

I will ask Red Hat legal if the name change is ok.  I wanted to see if
there were objections to doing this, not that I really expected any.

cgf