Slashdot Mirror


Firebird Name Debate Enters a New Stage

An anonymous reader writes "As many readers will know, mozilla.org was asked to change the name for their standalone browser, Phoenix as another browser had the same name. After months of discussion, the new name was announced as Mozilla Firebird. Despite the new name being approved by AOL Legal, supporters of the FirebirdSQL database were quick to object (though the name is also used by many other people). A coincidentally named supporter of FirebirdSQL, IBPhoenix, put up a slightly immature request for their readers to participate in mass posting campaign targetting mozilla.org developers' email accounts, newsgroups and even forums at independent sites such as MozillaZine and Slashdot. FirebirdSQL's official site later reiterated this message. However, IBPhoenix have now declared this shock-and-awe stage of their campaign over, heralding it a success. Their second stage calls for a more focussed email protest at just two of mozilla.org's members: Mitchell Baker (mozilla.org's leader) and Asa Dotzler (announcer of the name change). In addition, they ask their readers to move away from 'derogatory messages' and to show more 'courtesy'. Unsurprisingly, the beleaguered admins of affected sites such as MozillaZine have welcomed this change of direction. This is getting very interesting!"

2 of 683 comments (clear)

  1. Re:One Man's Opinion by smcn · · Score: 5, Informative

    According to the Phoenix (now Firebird) project page, they already went through months of legal investigation and deemed Firebird a perfectly usable and un-infringing name. There is no way they will change it now.

    Also, considering the Firebird Database is an open source project, I doubt they would be able/willing to bring up a lawsuit for the name anyhow.

  2. Re:The new name by kurisuto · · Score: 5, Informative

    It's more complicated than that; the law you reference simply tells how to affix a copyright notice if you choose to.

    Prior to the 1976 revision of U.S. copyright law, you would actually lose your copyright to a work if you published it without proper copyright notice being displayed.

    After 1976, you automatically obtain copyright on your work as soon as it is fixed in a tangible format. You own the copyright whether you add the copyright notice or not. Including the copyright notice is still a good idea, however, because it makes it easier to establish that someone _knowingly_ violated your copyright; it can affect the amount of damages you receive.

    All of this stuff is in the circulars which the U.S. Copyright office makes available on the web.