MozillaZine

Firebird Database Project Issues New Statement on Naming Debate

Thursday May 1st, 2003

On Tuesday, the Firebird database project's main front page was updated with another statement from the Firebird Admins about the naming controversy. The announcement suggests that the database project's leaders may be satisified if mozilla.org and related sites follow the policy of the Mozilla branding guidelines to the letter and only ever refer to the former Phoenix browser as 'Mozilla Firebird'. According to the update, the Firebird Admins, the FirebirdSQL Foundation committee and the IBPhoenix principals (the IBPhoenix site appears to be down right now) sent a formal letter to mozilla.org on Friday and are awaiting a response.

The statement also links to an assessment of the Firebird database community's legal position, published by the FirebirdSQL Foundation. We were not able to verify the accuracy of this legal advice, which was researched by Pavel Cisar, one of the database project's administrators, and two unnamed legal consultants. Interestingly, the document reveals for the first time that the FirebirdSQL Foundation is considering suing mozilla.org. In the past, the group has claimed that they are not interested in taking legal action and could not afford to anyway. The Foundation has also published another summary of how they believe mozilla.org's use of the Firebird name harms the database project.


#1 their legal position seems quite reasonable to me

by warenhaus

Thursday May 1st, 2003 2:08 PM

Reply to this message

and comprehensible, too.

#6 Old documents (pre-Branding)

by JuanGonzalez

Thursday May 1st, 2003 3:14 PM

Reply to this message

According to those lawyers, it seems that we can say "Mozilla Firebird", but never just "Firebird"... Oops, sorry I just said it. :-)

A little difficult to remember. It's better/simpler the new Mozilla Branding <http://www.mozilla.org/roadmap/branding.html>

BTW, those documents are a bit old now, and previous to the Mozilla Branding document. They say:

"When this issue first blew up, we took legal advice. On Friday (April 25), we (Firebird Admins), the FirebirdSQL Foundation committee and the IBPhoenix principals wrote a formal letter to the Mozilla admins [...] However, over the weekend and today, we note a branding policy statement [...]" <http://www.firebirdsql.org/>

It does not seem likely that they are still thinking of going to court or anything like that, when we are going to have Mozilla Browser 1.5 alfa in June.

Something indeed reasonable is that they also prefer now to talk directly with the Mozilla team instead of publicly. A procedural detail that we can suggest to them is that the correct and official way in Mozilla for other projects (apart from very technical matters) is the spokesperson rather than the software developers (see mozilla.org for details). People say she is very efficient with public relations, legal matters, etc. Or, naturally, you know, she may delegate a suitable representative for exchange of communication about any final details of this issue. It's good to see that the things can go at last in the normal way.

Well, life goes on... The MozillaZine Forums are working again. This is the news now. :-)

#7 Re: Old documents (pre-Branding)

by AlexBishop <alex@mozillazine.org>

Thursday May 1st, 2003 3:19 PM

Reply to this message

"According to those lawyers..."

It never says that they are lawyers.

Alex

#8 Re: Re: Old documents (pre-Branding)

by JuanGonzalez

Thursday May 1st, 2003 3:28 PM

Reply to this message

You are right, that document about trademarks <http://firebirdsql.org/ff….php?id=fb_trademark.html> doesn't say "lawyers" but "legal consultants", lawyers or not. Sorry, I'm just a mathematics teacher apart from a webmaster. :-)

#2 Why did we have to begin such a mess?

by tseelee

Thursday May 1st, 2003 2:14 PM

Reply to this message

As a Moz user since b4 v1.0 and loyal Netscape user b4 that, here's mo opinion: Just drop the name. It's not like irreplaceable.

#28 I agree. Mozilla started the whole legal crap

by paulm

Friday May 2nd, 2003 1:27 AM

Reply to this message

In my opinion (as someone who follows and supports the Mozilla project and has never even looked at the Firebird DB) Mozilla.org let us down by taking the line that a legally defensible position is sufficient.

What is legally required is a minimum standard and the project should have strived to not only meet that but also meet acceptible levels of behaviour amoungst the wider open source community of which we are part.

(If it is just a codename then call it "Fawkes" , the Phoenix from Harry Potter and a homonym of "forks" which is mildly amusing and appropriate in that it is a different fork in the development path of a Mozilla Browser).

#38 and mozilla should stop it - loud and clear

by mhonline

Friday May 2nd, 2003 4:57 AM

Reply to this message

yes, even if there are ways/chance to stand a legal fight, it is what it is: unforced unfriendlyness. It does not matter by whom and where this comes from, it is a mistake. So the only way to solve is be polite, apologize, and return to work - yes - there is some.

rgds Martin

#56 my opinion exactly

by jilles

Saturday May 3rd, 2003 5:40 AM

Reply to this message

Am I the only one wondering why this conflict has still not been resolved? Please grow up and get back to coding.

#3 these guys are bordeline racist

by joschi

Thursday May 1st, 2003 2:15 PM

Reply to this message

"Currently, there isn't any another important software product called Firebird in the world-wide market."

I'm sure the the Firebird BBS folks who predate Firebird SQL would beg to differ:

<http://www.firebird.org.tw/>

they keep trying to imply that FireBird BBS doesnt have a valid claim on the name because they are from Taiwan... what's up with that? seriously, that is reprehensible.

#5 Re: these guys are bordeline racist

by MarkHB

Thursday May 1st, 2003 2:50 PM

Reply to this message

They address that in the legal paper; according to them, the name of the Taiwanese product is "Firebird BBS," whereas the name of the db (and, many of us thought, the new name for Phoenix) is just "Firebird." That distinction is the reason that calling the browser "Mozilla Firebird" is a valid solution.

#20 Doesn't matter

by user4321

Thursday May 1st, 2003 8:58 PM

Reply to this message

You don't have to do but a tiny little bit of reading about trademark law to find out that in this case, that distinction is meaningless.

Where that type of distinction becomes important in when you're trying to trademark a generic term which has been deemed too generic for trademark protection. So perhaps "Firebird" couldn't be trademarked, but "Firebird BBS" could be considered specific and unique enough that it could.

Of course, you see the problem: their argument only holds water if they claim their mark is "Firebird Database," not just "Firebird." Even then, it would be weak, as they'd have combined a generic term with a type of software's common name. It's actually somewhat unusual for trademark protection to be granted to such combinations.

Basically, they're blathering on cluelessly as they have been from the beginning, completely ignoring the fact that if their judgement is this poor in a situation so unbelievably trivial, there's no way in hell I'd trust my data to any software they produced.

Ironic that, because I did almost use that database in a project a while back (not too long after it was open sourced). You can bet your ass that'll be the last time I or anybody I know gives it any consideration.

#23 To add to the list

by teko_teko

Thursday May 1st, 2003 9:31 PM

Reply to this message

#46 Sorry, no dice

by Kovu <Kovu401@netscape.net>

Friday May 2nd, 2003 9:40 AM

Reply to this message

All of the links you supplied include Firebird in a company name, which is totally irrelevant to this situation. The issue at hand is product names, not company names.

#32 Re: these guys are bordeline racist

by lsces

Friday May 2nd, 2003 2:18 AM

Reply to this message

Please would someone provide a translation of the Firebird BBS information. The last news post is Jan2002, and the software predates that. Only part of the site still works, and there has been no reply to attempts to eMail them. While the site is up, it would not appear to be active, but ANY responce from them in this matter would be nice.

But that is another matter, and there have been no objections from that group.

#4 Uh. Anybody remember the Pontiac Firebird?

by ndebord

Thursday May 1st, 2003 2:45 PM

Reply to this message

I never liked the Firebird name as I though it was not unique or descriptive enough for the product and as I mentioned above, it is used goods and most people will rightly associate it with the care, not web products.

N

#9 Firebird considering a lawsuit against Mozilla...

by zookqvalem

Thursday May 1st, 2003 3:32 PM

Reply to this message

Saw the comments that the Firebird is considering on suing Mozilla.org over the word, 'Firebird'. I think that is stupid. Everybody want to sue over little things. Mozilla already announced that on the next cycle, it will be called Mozilla Browser, meaning it is no longer called a Firebird. Don't the Firebird SQL folks ever get it? This is plain dumb of them to consider doing that.

#10 Come. Sue me.

by Kommet

Thursday May 1st, 2003 4:56 PM

Reply to this message

Firebird, Firebird, Firebird, Firebird. The browser.

Used to be called Phoenix, Phoenix, Phoenix, Phoenix. The non-BIOS company, open-source browser.

Now go ahead and sue me. I said Firebird and meant a browser and not a car or a DB or a BBS or a blender. How naughty. How mean. How "Who gives a shit?".

. . . . .

Enough of this bullshit. All I hear is: "We are being hurt! We had that name third! We are going to sue!"

The only thing they are really doing is being annoying. Even IF they had a valid argument (legal or otherwise) their tactics are childish, poorly conceived, and creating a fair amount of badwill (opposite of goodwill :-) ) for their project. I can think of a thousand better ways to approach the issue than spamming forums at MZ or mailbombing Mozilla.org people.

Any claims that Mozilla (the organization) was harsh or uncaring or bellicose are falling on deaf ears here. Their behavior has given me no incentive to give 1/1000th of a shit about what they are saying. The message got lost in the delivery.

They may have one hell of a relational database, but I, for one, am not being convinced to try it to find. I do think the FirebirdSQL and IBPhoenix admins will be passing their next physicals, though. Their reflexes are obviously fine, as proven by the recent knee-jerk reaction...

#12 Re: Come. Sue me.

by mozineAdmin

Thursday May 1st, 2003 5:24 PM

Reply to this message

I agree completely - did you read my mind, perhaps? Their behavior has been unseemly, and I think they squandered any goodwill they could have received.

#14 Re: Come. Sue me.

by beg_ne

Thursday May 1st, 2003 6:50 PM

Reply to this message

I agree, the behaviour i've observed from the developers and community of the Firebird DB has been pathetic. They have been extremely childish and have no real claim to the "Firebird" name, even though some of them almost go as far to claim their own the word "Firebird".

The only damage IMO to them has been done by them. I know that I personally if ever the chance comes along will actively discourage any use of the Firebird database by any of my customers.

#36 don't be childish yourself

by paxvel

Friday May 2nd, 2003 4:31 AM

Reply to this message

I would not like to be among your customers if you judge product quality by the attitude of project admins. Actively discouraging anything for any other reason than actual suitability for the customer is non-professional. If you are a consultant, you are paid to find the best solution possible. Customers pay you in good faith that they receive professional, unbiased solution - not your personal opinion about people behind products. Many people consider Theo de Raadt an unpleasant person, but it doesn't stop them from using OpenBSD. A lot of people dislike Microsoft and still develop and use Windows-based solutions.

I am a networker, not a DB consultant, so I don't give a damn about Firebird-the-DB myself. But if your customers trust you in the DB area, act professionally and be objective - the customers deserve it. Well, I am sure the choice will be still Oracle/DB2/MySQL/Postgress anyway, but who knows.

P.S. I believe "Firebird" is a lame name, for both databases and browsers.

#47 Argh

by Kovu <Kovu401@netscape.net>

Friday May 2nd, 2003 9:47 AM

Reply to this message

Firebird is a natural replacement for Phoenix, and has the same connotations. Hence the name. It's really irrelevant all around. The current Mozilla (with everything and the kitchen sink) is called "seamonkey" but no one really calls it that. Bottom line: who cares if you like the name? Who cares if I do? It's an internal designation to distinguish the browser-only app from the everything and the kitchen sink app.

#22 Re:Come. Sue me.

by superyooser

Thursday May 1st, 2003 9:22 PM

Reply to this message

What the world

needs now

is love

sweet love.

I can't understand the reason for Mozilla.org's obstinance. Being part of a community -- as in the free software community -- means being considerate of your neighbors and *sensitive* to their welfare. We're working for a common goal: the free exchange of knowledge and technology for the betterment of humanity. In this spirit of charity, each member of the community should do everything on his part to live in harmony with everybody else. That includes overlooking grievances and immaturity of others (e.g., the other side *not* doing everything on their part to live in harmony).

Now, the Firebird database people feel they have been hurt by Mozilla.org. Mozilla.org has been aware of the potential for conflict over the name since the beginning of their re-naming discussion. However, the Mozilla.org people didn't care. They claim that they assumed that co-opting Firebird's name wouldn't hurt the Firebird project, but they were not concerned enough to *genuinely* investigate the conflict. One simple e-mail to the FirebirdSQL admin would have been sufficient to know that their assumption was terribly wrong. They just DID NOT CARE that their actions might hurt others. They didn't care about the harm done to other software developers and users, even in their own community. And a lot of people in this forum don't care either. It's sad and disappointing that this is happening. Even more disturbing is that the more mean someone is, the more oblivious he is to his own meanness, as evidenced right here by your post and the replying post agreeing with you.

Disclaimer: I have been a big fan of Mozilla since the early milestones and still am. I have no personal interest in the Firebird database.

Suggestion: I think Mozilla Firebird should be named Freebird, as in Free Software. It would be appropriate, original (for software), and appealing, IMHO.

#48 What the world needs now...

by JuanGonzalez

Friday May 2nd, 2003 10:59 AM

Reply to this message

superyooser wrote:

>What the world

>needs now

>is love

>sweet love.

Ah... That's the good old Burt Bacharach & Hal David. Song sample (#5, singer Jackie DeShannon) at: <http://www.amazon.com/exe…s/tg/detail/-/B00000J7QG/> . Lyrics and midi: <http://arose4ever.com/roses/world_needs_now.htm> ;-)

#49 Bull crap

by jedbro

Friday May 2nd, 2003 11:05 AM

Reply to this message

That is the same bull-crap I have been hearing for weeks.

Mozilla didn't care? What? I can't believe you look at it that way. Mozilla didn't think it would be a issue, a problem. I for one knew of FireBird (the DB) before the name change. I also voted for Phoenix to become FireBird. It didn't even remotely pass through my mind that there would be a conflict between these products due to a Name. I think mozilla thought the same.

""Being part of a community -- as in the free software community -- means being considerate of your neighbors and *sensitive* to their welfare."""

You talk about Open Source friendship and helping each other out. The "What the F*ck is FireBird doing". If I were JED, and open source organization, and Another bigger org, calls their product Jed, I would be stoked. Being in the Open Source community, things like this should be sought out in friendly manners, not in the typical (FireBird DB response) MS hate banwagon of "here are there e-mails, let them know why you dissagree). Now who is not playing friendly in the OpenSource Community???

If I were firebird, I would be exited, and say hey, you should have asked, but we all want the same thing "Free quality opensource product", let's benifit ourselves mutually, and in each Project respective FireBird page, post links to eachothers FireBird product, therefore eliminating confusion, and bringing in more users."

Now that to me would be a "community". It's funny you don't see it that way.

Mozilla did make a mistake, true, but fireBird DB took it to another level, and made it into a commercial battle. Mozilla retracted, and yet they still are playing their childish "not so friendly OpenSource Community games".

You be the judge

#11 Just a question...

by hitokage

Thursday May 1st, 2003 5:21 PM

Reply to this message

With the major changes that are to be made for 1.5, and beyond - why aren't we calling this Mozilla 2.0? This would leave some room for the suite version until everything is stablilized again.

#13 Where's this blown up out of again?

by GAThrawn

Thursday May 1st, 2003 5:54 PM

Reply to this message

I thought this all blew over before the beginning of this week?

Come on guys live and let live. What is the point in threatening to bring out the lawyers against a temporary internal project name that will essentially be dropped once Moz 1.4 is released and branched off, and the new Mozilla trunk will be based on Mozilla Friebird, Mozilla Thunderbird plus (the as yet un-rebranded) composer, calendar etc.

Sure so people on _Mozilla_ related sites currently just call the offshoot "Firebird", there's a reason for that: it's a _Mozilla_related_site_

And once the Firebird browser becomes the main development branch it will _be_ Mozilla, not Firebird.

Storm in a teacup.

#15 Re: Where's this blown up out of again?

by tve

Thursday May 1st, 2003 7:13 PM

Reply to this message

>>What is the point in threatening to bring out the lawyers against a temporary internal project name

ummm, good publicity? :)

#16 Re: I partly agree ...

by Blake <blaker@netscape.com>

Thursday May 1st, 2003 7:25 PM

Reply to this message

The findings of IBPhoenix's "legal consultants" is wrong and irrelevant. We are not intimidated by documents written by people who very clearly are trying to sound official and authoritative. There are plenty of usages of plain old "Firebird" that predate Firebird SQL and fall neatly into the software category, e.g. <http://www.wurb.com/if/game/86>. Heck, that document itself even mentions some uses but, oddly enough, dismisses them as irrelevant because they are "confined to games." Huh? Elsewhere, you guys are trying to argue that anything in class 9 is infringement.

#17 Re: I partly agree ...

by Blake <blaker@netscape.com>

Thursday May 1st, 2003 7:31 PM

Reply to this message

The findings of IBPhoenix's "legal consultants" is wrong and irrelevant. We are not intimidated by documents written by people who very clearly are trying to sound official and authoritative. There are plenty of usages of plain old "Firebird" that predate Firebird SQL and fall neatly into the software category, e.g. (LINK) Heck, that document itself even mentions some uses but, oddly enough, dismisses them as irrelevant because they are "confined to games." Huh? Elsewhere, you guys are trying to argue that anything in class 9 is infringement.

I suggest you guys ditch whoever put on "legal consultant" hats and hire real lawyers if you really want solid legal advice. Here's a hint: the "importance" of the alleged infringer has nothing to do with whether you have to defend your mark ( "Currently, there isn't any another important software product called Firebird in the world-wide market," from <http://firebirdsql.org/ff…php?id=fbtm_linkhere.html> )

#31 the point is

by warenhaus

Friday May 2nd, 2003 1:57 AM

Reply to this message

the point is that if you think you own the trademark, you have to defend it. if you don't defend it, you'll lose the right to exclusivly use it. whether or not Mozilla thinks that Database doesn't own the TM, is of no importance. if THEY (db) think so, they have to defend it. another consequence is that if the database used the TM "Firebird" for some years (which they did), without anyone on planet software objecting to that use, they seem to rightfully use it.

#18 Yay

by adipose

Thursday May 1st, 2003 7:40 PM

Reply to this message

According to their arguments, "Mozilla Firebird" is fine. Of course, that means we could have legitimately called it "Mozilla Phoenix." All this work to find a new name, and we have to prefix it with "Mozilla" anyway. In any case, this should satisfy the FirebirdSQL people and no mozilla folks should really have a problem with "Mozilla Firebird" considering the new project direction.

Although, I still think we might as well change it back to Phoenix now...

-Dan

#19 Re: Yay

by zookqvalem

Thursday May 1st, 2003 8:29 PM

Reply to this message

And have problem with Phoenix all over again? No thanks!!!

#29 No...

by adipose

Friday May 2nd, 2003 1:29 AM

Reply to this message

How can they complain if it's called "Mozilla Phoenix"? That's clearly a distinct name from "Phoenix."

-Dan

#43 Not quite...

by zookqvalem

Friday May 2nd, 2003 7:06 AM

Reply to this message

Not quite! People still don't care if there is a word 'Phoenix' in the 'Mozilla Phoenix' and still complain or threaten about it. After all, these people are entile to free speech...

#21 it doesnt work like that.

by joschi

Thursday May 1st, 2003 9:13 PM

Reply to this message

thew firebirdSQL guys are just plain wrong in how they are trying to bend the law. phoenix conflicted becayse there is a preexisting *browser* called phoenix, this does not apply to the firebird case. the fact that mozilla is offically using Mozilla Firebird is a major consession on their part...

this needs to die.

#25 Depends...

by aganguli

Thursday May 1st, 2003 11:00 PM

Reply to this message

on what is considered the domain of the trademark. Among the many possibilities are: all software, all open-source software, only browsers.

AOL legal seems to think that only browsers count. I have no idea how this stuff is really decided (IANAL), but that seems a little weak if that's the extent of the arguement. Does that mean the Firebird SQL folks could legitimately call their database The Mozilla Database? Surely that can't be right.

Or, maybe Mozilla's new browser should be called the Oracle Browser? I think Oracle would be a great name for a browser if we can take it. Much better than Firebird.

#40 Your argument is faulty

by bandido

Friday May 2nd, 2003 5:43 AM

Reply to this message

"Legally, naming any "electronic" product "Firebird" should not be allowed if the Firebird SQL group wanted to challenge it. There is no distinction in the trademark/copyright law which says, "as long as they aren't the same type of software, it's ok." I repeat: there is *NO* such distinction! In fact, they don't even have to both be software products, tech.."

So in other words you are arguing the point FirebirdSQL is not entiltled to use that name because there are other projects using that name Like Firebird BBS < <http://www.firebird.org.tw/> >, Firebird game (software) < <http://www.wurb.com/if/game/86>. >, a web design company < <http://www.firebird.net/> > and many more. Intereswtingly these companies use FIREBIRD as their only descriptor in their web address. Humm, Firebase DB uses FirebirdSQL in their webpage which to me is a more correct and unique name than just plain Firebird. Why is that they didn't name their DB that way? Hypocrites!.

"They were here first, and whoever looked up the name "Firebird" did a shoddy job of checking for conflicts. "

They were "here" first? Really? Look at the links above and show will see they were "there" first.

"Typically you don't name a software product with a name that has already been taken" Well, humm, lets see: Wordstar wordprocessor, WordPerfect processor, Word (by Microsoft) and my favorite comparison, Word Pro (by Lotus). How many people you think believe Word Pro was the professional version of Word? They all use the word "word" and they all operate in the same field.

The entire FirebirdSQL vs. Mozilla Firebird is plain silly, and if I want to talk about Firebird (the browser) without preceding it with Moz, what are they going to do? Sue me. FirebirdSQL free lunch (in publicity) is about to end.

#54 No, you just misunderstood it

by adipose

Saturday May 3rd, 2003 4:39 AM

Reply to this message

As I said, unless companies try to protect their copyrights, they are meaningless. None of the other groups challenged Firebird SQL's right to the name. Hence, they got it, and have been promoting the name ever since. Now that someone is trying to take it, they are fighting. That establishes their right to the name!

> They were "here" first? Really? Look at the links above and show will see they were "there" first.

Meaning before Moz. took the name. Firebird SQL has been around for several years with no (that I know of, anyway) lawsuits or challengs to their use of the name. That means they get it, especially if they challenge newcomers who try to use it.

> Well, humm, lets see: Wordstar wordprocessor, WordPerfect processor, > Word (by Microsoft) and my favorite comparison, Word Pro (by Lotus). > How many people you think believe Word Pro was the professional > version of Word? They all use the word "word" and they all operate in the same field.

Are you deliberately being dense? None of these products was named the same as the other. They all contained the word "word," yes, but that isn't the same. I said you don't typically name a product with a name that has been taken. E.g., I can't start a word processor and call it "Word" (or "Excel" for that matter). No way would MS let me get away with that (unless I was too small for them to notice).

However, there have been products which have been named identically. I never said it didn't happen, I just said it wasn't typical. Remember: in general, you must fight to maintain your right to a trademark. Otherwise the trademark is considered meaningless since you allowed others to use it. And it is not unheard of to trademark something even after prior use. This doesn't mean I agree with trademark law and practices, but this is the way it is.

-Dan

#58 s/copyrights/trademarks/g

by adipose

Saturday May 3rd, 2003 2:18 PM

Reply to this message

--

#41 Mozilla is a made up name...

by STED

Friday May 2nd, 2003 5:50 AM

Reply to this message

Mozilla is an invented name. Firebird is a very common word preexisting already in many different software projects.

That is the reason why you cannot use Mozilla any way you please for your next software product, while phoenix is pretty much there for anyone to use (just as how the database people choose took it even though there are many many projects that predates their project).

#27 Sure it does

by adipose

Friday May 2nd, 2003 1:26 AM

Reply to this message

We all know very well that this wouldn't even be an issue if it were a bigger company's trademark at stake. No way would they try to call it "Oracle," "Outlook," or "Explorer," or "Windows" even though these are all preexisting words which never referred to browsers. MS or Oracle would both go for the throat if Mozilla tried that, and would almost certainly win. Typically you don't name a software product with a name that has already been taken, even if it's a different class of software. The difference here is that Firebird SQL is almost small enough to ignore.

By the way, the reason the "Phoenix" name mattered isn't because there was a browser called "Phoenix." It's because a company called "Phoenix Technologies" was making *a* browser, and thought it would be confusing (and they were probably somewhat right).

Legally, naming any "electronic" product "Firebird" should not be allowed if the Firebird SQL group wanted to challenge it. There is no distinction in the trademark/copyright law which says, "as long as they aren't the same type of software, it's ok." I repeat: there is *NO* such distinction! In fact, they don't even have to both be software products, technically. The only reason it would matter is if someone didn't care enough to protect their own trademark. E.g., if Firebird SQL didn't care about this there would be no problem. But they DO care, so the right thing to do is to back off. Calling it "Mozilla Firebird" is plenty backing off for me (and therefore, "Mozilla Phoenix" should be fine as well).

Now what it comes down to is whether Firebird SQL should be pushing the issue, morally. Well, they have a legal right, and (I think) a legitimate worry that this will confuse users. So what's the problem? They were here first, and whoever looked up the name "Firebird" did a shoddy job of checking for conflicts.

Think I'm wrong? Write a database program and call it "Opera". See how far you get.

-Dan

#61 look, IMHO they lost their chance to defend it

by joschi

Saturday May 3rd, 2003 7:08 PM

Reply to this message

once they took a generic word which was already in use in other software projects they lost any legal footing to claim its their trademark. for years they did nothing about "enforcing" it because they had no right to, as the Firebird BBS people clearly predated their use of it. the SQL guys just have not legal footing for their threatening posturing.

#65 you contradict yourself

by warenhaus

Sunday May 4th, 2003 9:55 AM

Reply to this message

the FbBBS, not the database, did nothing for years to enforce their TM. Thus, they lost their right to axclusively use it. to the BBS, it seemingly was ok that the database used it. they did, and by doing so, they established it as their trademark. Now, they have to defend it to not lose it.

#81 no, you didnt understand

by joschi

Monday May 5th, 2003 12:35 PM

Reply to this message

let me quote myself since you seem to not have noticed this text before:

"for years they [firebird sql] did nothing about "enforcing" it because they had no right to, as the Firebird BBS people clearly predated their use of it."

if the firebird sql people *ever* had a right to the exclusive use of the word firebird (imho they never did) then by your own argument, they threw that out the window when they failed to enforce it against all the other software projects using the name. for *years* they did nothing to "enforce" their "claim" ... if they ever had a chance, they already blew it.

#26 RE: Yay

by erickleung

Friday May 2nd, 2003 12:26 AM

Reply to this message

'Mozilla Firebird' and 'Firebird' are very clear two different product names. I think it is wonderful if we can maintain the original name as 'Mozilla phoenix'. It took years to build up a good brand name reputation.

#24 Phoenix Firebirds

by cactusleague <gaasbyte@netscape.net>

Thursday May 1st, 2003 9:40 PM

Reply to this message

AAA farm team for the San Francisco Giants

#30 Communicator...?

by scorzonera

Friday May 2nd, 2003 1:47 AM

Reply to this message

The way I see it; The Firebird db people aren't too happy about the way Mozilla responds to their objections and complaints. They are frustrated to the point that they are now even considering legal action(s) and even publish this consideration.

This could have been prevented, of course.

If you do not know how or why this chain of events could have been prevented; than that's something to worry about. And it's very likely that this sort of BS will occur again, at some point in the (near) future and in another form or shape with other people or companies or organizations at 'the other side'...

#35 Re: Communicator...?

by erickleung

Friday May 2nd, 2003 4:27 AM

Reply to this message

Did you follow the story completely? Did you read an interview with FirebirdSQL people over the topic before you made your decision?

<http://www.mozillazine.or…articles/article3097.html>

#33 Am I missing something...

by leafdigital

Friday May 2nd, 2003 3:16 AM

Reply to this message

Am I missing something or is this entire argument pointless in view of the branding guidelines, which clearly state that Firebird (or, if you prefer, 'Mozilla Firebird') is an internal name only, and when there is actually a release of the product it'll be called Mozilla Browser (or, for normal people, 'Mozilla') same as always?

Also, it seems to me that this relevant point from the branding guidelines was never posted very clearly on the front page, though the guidelines were linked a couple of times... I think 'Mozilla makes no claim to Firebird name, uses it only as internal codename for a limited period of time' was pretty important as a news story, and a lot of people don't seem to understand it...

(All this assuming I read the branding guidelines correctly.)

By the way I think (a) Firebird as a name sucks, should never have been chosen, and I'm glad it won't be used permanently/for a real release name, and (b) the Firebird SQL project's actions on this are utterly reprehensible. Scum. I hope their database continues on its journey to yawning mediocrity.

--quen

#34 RE:

by erickleung

Friday May 2nd, 2003 3:58 AM

Reply to this message

The flame war is started when an article : 'Phoenix and Minotaur to be renamed Firebird and Thunderbird' dated April 14th was posted as '<http://www.mozillazine.or…alkback.html?article=3075>'.

Mozilla people just were not aware that the keyword 'Firebird' is just like 'Mozilla' is to mozilla.org.

When Borland was one time decided to drop their Interbase product, and open the program sources to the public, several developers have established companies to take over the product. And 'Firebird' is finally formed, and it is a fork of the later Interbase 6.0 open edition.

And the flame war seems ended when the mentioned 'Mozilla branding guidelines' article was posted on April 26th.

#37 Lawsuit?

by metalcrypt66

Friday May 2nd, 2003 4:40 AM

Reply to this message

With all the free publicity they got out of this, they should be sending thank you notes. Of course, issuing statements like that gives them even more media coverage so....

People will sue for anything these days. Sad world.

#39 All gone far to far

by AndyMcM

Friday May 2nd, 2003 5:31 AM

Reply to this message

Okay this is just daft this thing has gone far to far now. Lets take a step back and try and have a sensible overview of this whole thing.

So first off Phoenix has been asked to change its name by a comercial company that produces BIOS's(there excuse they are going to start to integrate browsers into BIOS's fair enough). So Mozilla says okay we have to change the name because we dont want any legal action against Mozilla because they can afford it if they loose.

So what do Mozilla decide to do change there name to Firebird but wait its already the name of a SMALLER open source project database project. Can no one see that Mozilla is doing exactly the same to the Firebird open source project as what Phoenix BIOS is doing to Mozilla?? Mozilla is pushing its weight around with Firebird DB to take its name from them. Its all school yard bullying going on here.

The way I see it is that Mozilla is being a bully in the open source comunity with this name thing. They seem to forget that they have just been bullyed themselves and should have some more respect for other projects in the open source comunity.

So now we have the whole name thing, Firebird is conceding that they will be happy if Mozilla call Phoenix "Mozilla Firebird" so can we not call Phoenix "Mozilla Phoenix" would this be enough to get Phoenix BIOS off Mozilla's back?

So we now get to a face off with everyone, hopefully some cool heads will prevail and calm the whole situation down and it will be sorted out sensibly.

#42 Firebird was never "theirs"

by STED

Friday May 2nd, 2003 6:02 AM

Reply to this message

> Mozilla is pushing its weight around with Firebird DB to take its name from them. Its all school yard bullying going on here.

If Mozilla is being a bully and "stealing" the databases name, then that serves them just right. Becuse in that case the database people themselfs stole the firebird name.

So by your logic, the bully (DB) is now whining becuse a bigger bully (moz) came and took what they stole in the first place.

#44 and by your logic

by warenhaus

Friday May 2nd, 2003 7:25 AM

Reply to this message

so by your logic the bigger bully has the right to steal a stolen name. not to give it back to the poor like robin hood, but to keep it for itself. what kind of logic is that? and if you say the db stole the name, can you cite any complaints or objections to the use of firebird as a trademark for the database?

and if you now say, no, they didn't steal it, because it's a generic word and no trademark at all - well then you can't complain about them (thinking about) going to court, as it surely isn't mozilla who decides what is to be considered a generic word or a trademark.

#51 no no no.

by joschi

Friday May 2nd, 2003 4:54 PM

Reply to this message

firebirdSQL are the only ones crying theft. mozilla contends that people sharing the name just fine before, so why should mozilla be treated any different. this really isnt very heard

#52 it's not up to mozilla to decide

by warenhaus

Saturday May 3rd, 2003 1:26 AM

Reply to this message

it's not up to mozilla to decide whether Firebird should share the name or not. it's up to whoever had it first. if the other software groups didn't care or object to the use of "Firebird" for a database, they indicated it's okay to them. now, Firebird says they don't want to share, mozilla can't complain about that.

#55 Exactly. Enough said

by adipose

Saturday May 3rd, 2003 4:45 AM

Reply to this message

--

#82 its not up to firbirdSQL to decide.

by joschi

Monday May 5th, 2003 12:36 PM

Reply to this message

they had no legitimate exclusive claim to a generic word which was in common use (predating their own use).

#75 Re: Re: Re: see it

by STED

Monday May 5th, 2003 3:47 AM

Reply to this message

> well then you can't complain about them (thinking about) going to court, as it surely isn't mozilla who decides what is to be considered a generic word or a trademark.

I'm not complaining, I'm just countering the silly argument that Mozilla is Bullying around some innocent little kid. They are not. What the DB people are doing is to get the free publicity and for the publicity alone.

Considering the DB peoples dishonest agenda and nonvalid claims I can't really understand how some people can be so blind and ignorant as to belive that they would have any chance with this in a court of law (even in US...)

#79 again

by warenhaus

Monday May 5th, 2003 6:30 AM

Reply to this message

again, it is not up to you, or mozilla.org, or the database, to decide what a generic word is and what constitutes a trademark infringement and who stole the name first. that is up to the law, so it's up to the courts, if Moz & Fb can't share the name.

if what you say is true, that Fb only seeks publicity, i don't see a reason to complain about that. nobody gets hurt by that. for now, i have read some interpretations of the tm-laws, citing the Product Class 9, that seemed completely logic to me. maybe a comment of one of mozilla's legal consultants would help - as we were being told for weeks, if not months, that they are verifying the new name. i didn't read any official comment about that. also, nobody could cite a law establishing "browsers" and "databases" as different products (in tm-law terms. i do know that they are different products in software terms). to me, they are both part of the category "software" and even this category is subsumed under the Class 9 category.

#83 its not up to *you* to decide.

by joschi

Monday May 5th, 2003 12:39 PM

Reply to this message

"to me, they are both part of the category "software" and even this category is subsumed under the Class 9 category."

well, if they think they have such a strong claim like you do, they *should* sue. but their claim of exclusive use to a common word which was in *uncontested* use by other software projects just stretches logic to a laughable degree.

#45 Just Rename The Damned Thing Again

by tny

Friday May 2nd, 2003 9:38 AM

Reply to this message

Let them have their little victory. If you want a list of viable monsters-from-mythology names, pull out a copy of Apollodorus's *Library* and run through that. There are enough Greek names which if transliterated accurately will seem sufficiently technologically cool and aren't being used for either open source projects or bioses or motor vehicles.

#50 No lawsuits in sight

by JuanGonzalez

Friday May 2nd, 2003 3:37 PM

Reply to this message

Well, given that they read MozillaZine, I've just looked a little at a public mirror of the Firebird-General list (details at ibphoenix.com) to see what's going on. Ahem... sorry for my curiosity. ;-)

They seem pretty satisfied with the new Mozilla Branding of April 25. So, I think that -since the Branding- there are no lawsuits in sight, on the contrary, they even say thanks and "good on yer" to the Mozilla people who removed the TMs, etc.

The atmosphere is very different from that of two weeks ago, when most people of the list weren't exactly kind to Brendan Eich (the technical director of Mozilla, and the creator of JavaScript), when he tried to talk to them and to make peace in the middle of the war. But these last days, the people of this Firebird list are much more relaxed and kind, and starting to talk more about other matters, like a new Firebird book, and so on.

Now, the only not positive point is that somebody has hacked ibphoenix.com (one of the main websites of the Firebird database OS community) on late Thursday evening. The hack was fairly major, with the website completely off-line, and they have needed a rebuild of the server, which is half-working again from today (Friday).

Let's hope this was just a coincidence, or at least the last friendly fire in the open source community starwars. :-/

#53 good to hear

by warenhaus

Saturday May 3rd, 2003 1:29 AM

Reply to this message

now i hope that here in these forums people stop to repeatedly equate the SQL-people with The Evil - we all now that it's MS.

#59 Branding OK, Firebird DB will wait for Mozilla 1.4

by JuanGonzalez

Saturday May 3rd, 2003 3:03 PM

Reply to this message

In a new note at ibphoenix.com, the Firebird database admins say that, with "Mozilla Firebird" as a project name, there is already a major improvement over using "Firebird(TM)", and also:

"If they follow their branding document and switch to Mozilla Browser later this month, we can all put this behind us."

I would say, just have a bit of patience, releases have usually a small delay. Mozilla 1.4 needs to be a very stable version (the last suite version), possibly around end of May, or even in June perhaps.

Well, it seems that the new Mozilla Branding is -more or less- OK as a middle point or fair solution for the admins of both open source projects. :-)

#63 ibphoenix.com hacked and down for two days

by JuanGonzalez

Sunday May 4th, 2003 4:09 AM

Reply to this message

Correction: According to a news item at ibphoenix.com, the regrettable hacking of their server was on Wednesday evening, East Coast US time (not Thursday). That is, their website has been down for nearly two days.

#57 brand this

by ratman

Saturday May 3rd, 2003 12:28 PM

Reply to this message

this whole "mozilla branding policy" has me somewhat confused. it seems like a lot of time and energy was spent choosing a new name for phoenix and then creating a carefully worded plan for using it. one would think that the name of a project for developers is a trivial issue, about as important as, say....

....the splash screen.

i mean, i always thought that the name of the mozilla web client for user consumption was "netscape".

#60 name war is over :)

by mariuz

Saturday May 3rd, 2003 3:52 PM

Reply to this message

Now let's continue the classic war mozilla->iexplorer and FireBirdSQL(MySQL,PostgreSQL)->mssql :) and start coding,testing,wordspreading ...

#62 Reminder: Moz stole name

by leet

Saturday May 3rd, 2003 8:43 PM

Reply to this message

Take a look at this mozilla.org hosted page, which has been updated without the TM. Think why Firebird people are so upset?

<http://www.google.com/sea…rd&hl=en&ie=UTF-8>

#70 So what's the point of that link?

by martrootamm

Sunday May 4th, 2003 6:24 PM

Reply to this message

Or your post? I am not seeing a point.

#73 google re-cache

by leet

Sunday May 4th, 2003 10:27 PM

Reply to this message

Apparently Google has since recached the document so the old version no longer exists, but you can tell what it had been from this: <http://www.mozillazine.or…alkback.html?article=3116>

Basically, the original document calls the browser Firebird with TM next to each instance.

#84 exactly, so what's the point? its the past

by joschi

Monday May 5th, 2003 12:41 PM

Reply to this message

one person made a mistake that was against official mozilla branding policy. it was pointed out, they then fixed the mistake. what was your point again?

#64 "You're on your own, baby"

by JStarkey <jas@netfrastructure.com>

Sunday May 4th, 2003 8:55 AM

Reply to this message

Let me start by re-iterating my position. While I am the original creator of the Firebird database, I am not part of the project, and I don't speak for the Firebird Foundation, the Firebird project, IBPhoenix, or Ann.

That said, here is a likely roadmap of how this will probably play out.

First, Firebird will send formal letters to Mozilla putting them on notice that they are in violation of Firebird's trademark. Simultaneously, Firebird will initiate formal registration of the mark. The Patent and Trademark Office will do an initial evaluation then publish the application for public comment. At that point, Mozilla.org, AOL, Firebird BBS, Firebird Design, Pontiac Firebird, and everyone on this list will have 30 days to file written objections (no standing is required). So everyone will have a chance to try out their novel theories on trademark law. The USPTO will, in all likelihood, accept the registration.

Firebird would then send registered letters to all parties infringing on the mark, demanding they cease and desist their infringement and notifying them of their liability for damages. Since, as far as we have been able to determine, Mozilla.org and Mozillazine have no legal existence, the letters would probably go the the individuals listed as administrative contacts for the domain names or listed as individuals on the masthead. Letters would also go to Mozilla's ISP and mirror sites. Letters would also be sent to distributors such as Red Hat and Suse putting them on notice.

If, at that point, Mozilla were to persist in infringement, Firebird could file suit in Federal court against the individuals, organizations, and corporations identified.

You can reasonably expect AOL's lawyers to tell you after translation from legaleze and/or Californian: "We told you the law. We didn't tell you to steal somebody else's trademark. You're on your own on this one, baby."

On the other hand, if Mozilla.org were to make a binding commitment to Firebird that "Mozilla Firebird" would be used solely as a project name for a stated period of time, and the the word "Firebird" would appear nowhere in the product itself or its documentation, I have no doubt that the Firebird Foundation would grant permission.

It's your choice.

#66 Hawks and doves

by JuanGonzalez

Sunday May 4th, 2003 11:11 AM

Reply to this message

JStarkey wrote:

> "Let me start by re-iterating my position. While I am the original creator of the Firebird database, I am not part of the project, and I don't speak for the Firebird Foundation, the Firebird project, IBPhoenix, or Ann."

Certainly, their tone is very different. They can reconcile in a middle point even if, in their opinion, they might get more by law. From ibphoenix.com:

"Does this change satisfy the Firebird admins? No, not really, but it is a major improvement over their using 'Firebird(TM)'. If they follow their branding document and switch to 'Mozilla Browser' later this month, we can all put this behind us." <http://www.ibphoenix.com/…nix&page=ibp_Mozilla5>

What is the official Firebird database position, yours or that of ibphoenix.com? According to the now much more relaxed atmosphere at the Firebird-General list (see the public mirror), I think most people related to the Firebird database feel in a much more reasonable and kind way now.

Well, after all the phrases of the style of "Firebird would then send registered letters to all parties infringing on the mark, demanding they cease and desist their infringement and notifying them of their liability for damages" (also Firebird BBS, Firebird Design...?), you at least say, at the end:

> "On the other hand, if Mozilla.org were to make a binding commitment to Firebird that 'Mozilla Firebird' would be used solely as a project name for a stated period of time, and the the word 'Firebird' would appear nowhere in the product itself or its documentation, I have no doubt that the Firebird Foundation would grant permission."

OK, but since end of May or perhaps since June, only the name "Mozilla Browser" will be used. Are the admins of the two open source projets going to fight about the small procedural details of this transition month? Let's hope both projects, Mozilla and Firebird database, will concede as much as possible to have, at last, a quick agreement about all these unimportant, trivial, insignificant things, instead of losing more and more valuable time.

We (common users and testers) cannot speak for the Mozilla staff, but surely we are a little afraid that, between the few John Waynes of the Firebird database asking for total submission (why they don't just celebrate the next renaming to "Mozilla Browser" in one month?), and the few John Waynes of Mozilla still so strangely attached to that particular name or bird (why they don't just drop that BurnedBird name now?), maybe we are going to have a nice month of May... Sorry for my sincerity. If some people of both sides cannot concede and are so proud about little things, let's hope Mozilla 1.4 will come soon to finish all this cartoon movie. With all the due respect for both sides. Sigh...

By the way, as common Mozilla users and testers, our sympathy to the people who have worked these days to rebuild the IBPhoenix server after its shameful hacking. I've read at ibphoenix.com that you also worked on the repairing.

#67 Too much sincerity :)

by JuanGonzalez

Sunday May 4th, 2003 11:33 AM

Reply to this message

Well, sorry if my last post has been too direct and not enough understanding to the different people's positions: what is not important for some, it's important for others. And yes, one should either: a) say the truth, or b) keep silence, if one cannot help to the people's agreement and cooperation.

#68 OK, Put it in Writing

by JStarkey <jas@netfrastructure.com>

Sunday May 4th, 2003 12:42 PM

Reply to this message

"OK, but since end of May or perhaps since June, only the name "Mozilla Browser" will be used. Are the admins of the two open source projets going to fight about the small procedural details of this transition month? Let's hope both projects, Mozilla and Firebird database, will concede as much as possible to have, at last, a quick agreement about all these unimportant, trivial, insignificant things, instead of losing more and more valuable time. "

If Mozilla.org were willing to put into a signed, binding agreement, we could put this all behind us. But if they're not even willing to discuss this, it does call into question their sincerity.

They know where to find Firebird. If they want to end it, have your guys contact our guys. Simple enough?

#69 The contact way, and what open source is...

by JuanGonzalez

Sunday May 4th, 2003 2:59 PM

Reply to this message

JStarkey wrote:

> "If Mozilla.org were willing to put into a signed, binding agreement, we could put this all behind us. But if they're not even willing to discuss this, it does call into question their sincerity."

> "They know where to find Firebird. If they want to end it, have your guys contact our guys. Simple enough?"

Yes, I've read at firebirdsql.org about the formal letter sent to Mozilla on April 25. If it's really true that they didn't reply, I admit that it's a little odd. A possible explanation is that perhaps they thought their answer was the new Mozilla Branding, published the same day, because this Branding is a middle point that seems to reasonably satisfy most people in the two open source projects. Of course I don't know, but this seems the most likely reason.

If you wish to discuss more details with the Mozilla staff, have you tried the normal and official contact way in Mozilla for other projects, explained already in the second half of a previous post? <http://www.mozillazine.or…icle=3134&message=6#6> If the spokesperson cannot at least delegate a representative to reply your messages with the official Mozilla position, I concede that it would be strange indeed, because I don't think that personal feelings will interfere with their professional efficiency.

But naturally this is a step more than just, for example, database people saying "they know where to find Firebird" or Mozilla people replying "we published the Branding already".

Please, both projects, walk that step, not to fight again, but to finish officially the fight and start collaborating together as the open source projects that you are. You are no more the Netscape and Borland corporations, but two developer communities, part of the worldwide open source movement. Surely all of us, grassroots of both projects, will be truly happy if you do it and shake hands.

Remember one of the most basic C++ codes:

if (OpenSource == FriendlyCooperation) { ItHasMeaning = true; }

;)

#76 OMG, plz live by what you preach...

by STED

Monday May 5th, 2003 4:03 AM

Reply to this message

> They know where to find Firebird. If they want to end it, have your guys contact our guys. Simple enough?

Obviously YOU DB people knew just how to get in touch the Mozilla people. Did you? No, you instead made sure every wannabe spammer sent loads of mail to whoever however remotely involved in this at mozilla.org

Once you people start to behave like grownups mayby someone will actually take you seriously...

#77 Sorry, we tried and we're still trying

by JStarkey <jas@netfrastructure.com>

Monday May 5th, 2003 5:51 AM

Reply to this message

From the beginning, the Firebird people HAVE been trying to talk the Mozilla folks, but they don't return phone calls, they don't reply to mail, and they don't respond on forums like this. Their activity through the mediator apparently started and stopped with a demand for an appology for trying to contact them, which they promptly turned into a headline article on Mozillazine.

The Firebird folk don't understand why they refuse to talk. Perhaps you could use your good efforts to convince the Mozilla.org guys to talk.

Your accusation of spamming is false and unfair. All the Firebird folks did was repost the email addresses of the Mozilla principles as posted on the Mozilla site. They made to efforts to recruit anyone to mailbomb these people. And, correct me if I'm wrong, none of the people listed have actually complained about the mail they received.

On the other hand, Mozilla members have send death threats to Ann and any number of obscene mail messages. If we wanted to play at the level of Mozilla, you would have seen a headline in the mainstream press "Software Group Issues Death Threat".

#78 death threats?

by warenhaus

Monday May 5th, 2003 6:14 AM

Reply to this message

death threats & obscene mails? really? awful. a male speaker definitely wouldn't have received obscene mails. i hope the explanation to this is the low age of the senders, but i am not sure if that really makes it any better. i like the new mozilla browser, but this whole story makes me sick. gone are the days i only had to worry about some badly composed sites that didn't work on non-IE-browsers. now i keep stumbling over rude messages to another open source project that, in my eyes, has all the rights on its side.

#80 Re: Sorry, we tried and we're still trying

by AlexBishop <alex@mozillazine.org>

Monday May 5th, 2003 6:39 AM

Reply to this message

"Their activity through the mediator apparently started and stopped with a demand for an appology for trying to contact them, which they promptly turned into a headline article on Mozillazine."

They didn't put the article on MozillaZine, I did. With no prompting from anybody else. MozillaZine is largely independent of the actions of mozilla.org. Any anyway, why did Ann Harrison announce the apology if she wasn't happy with it being publicised?

"Your accusation of spamming is false and unfair. All the Firebird folks did was repost the email addresses of the Mozilla principles as posted on the Mozilla site. They made to efforts to recruit anyone to mailbomb these people."

I assume "to" in the last sentence should be "no".

While that may be true, it was a best naive not to anticipate the reaction the reposting would cause. And posting 24 email addresses (or however many it was) would seem a little excessive to me.

"And, correct me if I'm wrong, none of the people listed have actually complained about the mail they received."

Mike Kaply, who works on Mozilla for IBM, did in a posting to Slashdot: <http://slashdot.org/comme…sid=60930&cid=5748691>

"On the other hand, Mozilla members have send death threats to Ann and any number of obscene mail messages. If we wanted to play at the level of Mozilla, you would have seen a headline in the mainstream press 'Software Group Issues Death Threat'."

That headline would be unfair as the leaders of mozilla.org (Staff, Drivers etc.) did not issue nor condone the death threats (at least I hope they didn't). Diverse open source communities do not act as one entity.

That said, I'm appalled that Ann has received death threats. If you believe that they are serious, you should report them to the police.

Alex

#85 Love your enemies (Matthew 5:43-48)

by JuanGonzalez

Tuesday May 6th, 2003 1:01 PM

Reply to this message

JStarkey wrote:

> "From the beginning, the Firebird people HAVE been trying to talk the Mozilla folks, but they don't return phone calls, they don't reply to mail, and they don't respond on forums like this. [...]"

In this case, things are really cold between the two open source projects now. Let's hope this will return to normality and serenity later, it would be good for everyone. If you wish normal communication between the two teams for a final and friendly agreement, please try again -in a courteous and reconciling way, naturally- through the usual Mozilla procedure for other projects described in a previous message <http://www.mozillazine.or…icle=3134&message=6#6> . If you are sincere about a reconciliation, but even so they are going to remember the mailbombing forever, this would be truly amazing, unless that your messages are still mentioning lawsuits, of course.

> "The Firebird folk don't understand why they refuse to talk. [...] And, correct me if I'm wrong, none of the people listed have actually complained about the mail they received."

Asa (at MozillaZine Forums): <http://www.mozillazine.or…ewtopic.php?p=69694#69694> , Brendan (at Firebird-general list = egroups.ibdi): <119/b7pisp+qva9@eGroups.com>" rel="nofollow"><news://news.atkin.com:<119/b7pisp+qva9@eGroups.com>> <news://news.atkin.com/egroups.ibdi> , etc...

> "On the other hand, Mozilla members have send death threats to Ann and any number of obscene mail messages. [...]"

I don't think those were Mozilla members, but surely we are without words after knowing this... :-(

Please, any Christians/Buddhists/Humans/Anything... out there?

<http://www.biblegateway.c…5%3A43-48&version=NIV>

#71 Re: I partly agree ...

by Blake <blaker@netscape.com>

Sunday May 4th, 2003 8:39 PM

Reply to this message

#72 Re: "You're on your own, baby"

by Blake <blaker@netscape.com>

Sunday May 4th, 2003 8:40 PM

Reply to this message

#74 Re: Re: "You're on your own, baby"

by the_Rebel

Sunday May 4th, 2003 11:55 PM

Reply to this message

Why are you trying to stir up trouble Blake?

Your petty claim of hypocrisy seems pretty bogus to me. Just drop it.