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.
#17 Re: I partly agree ...
Thursday May 1st, 2003 7:31 PM
You are replying 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> )