Slashdot Mirror


Firebird Database Project Admin on Name Clash

CapnKirk writes "Ann Harrison weighs in on the "Firebird--database or browser?" name clash. Her take on things: our users feel threatened. We're responding to their concerns. AOL lawyers said it's ok, so the Mozilla team isn't interested in negotiating, but that's ok because we've gotten a lot of publicity and name recognition. And no, we don't plan on going to court." As always, a small group of users are being real asses about the whole thing. Yay.

90 of 562 comments (clear)

  1. Well you know what they say about publicity ... by mingot · · Score: 2

    There is no bad kind.

    1. Re:Well you know what they say about publicity ... by iapetus · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Both, although from what I've seen it has mostly been the Firebird DB enthusiasts acting like asses and spurning logic. That's not to say the Mozilla Firebird fans haven't been acting like asses, of course. They just haven't been doing it as loudly in the places I've been watching the 'debate' (mostly the Mozillazine forums).

      The whole thing seems like a huge non-issue to me. Plenty of open source projects with the same name have managed to live together in the past, even where one of them is from an open source Goliath. I use JasperReports on top of Apache's Jasper JSP engine, and considered using the Jasper image libraries to generate images for my reports. Did this confuse me? No. Did it confuse me when I searched for documentation on Google? No, because I'm capable of using it. And perhaps I've just missed it, but I don't remember any vehement flame wars about the shared name.

      Another name which has been shared peacefully in the past is Firebird. When the Firebird DB project grabbed the name, which had already been associated with, among other things, BBS software, I don't believe there was a great wailing and gnashing of teeth. The users and developers of the various previous Firebird applications were happy enough to go on with the same name.

      At the end of the day, Firebird is a common word. It has Phoenix associations, which makes it an obvious name for any project rising from the ashes of another. It's the name of a car. It's the name of a software house from the 8-bit days. It's found in dictionaries: Websters lists it as a common name for the Baltimore Oriole, and WordNet adds two other species of bird. The reason the AOL legal department agreed to the name, and one of the reasons the Firebird DB team don't want a court case, is that they don't have a leg to stand on. As Ann Harrison points out, trademarks have to be defended. Firebird the DB has shared that name with more than enough other pieces of software to make it clear that they weren't interested in defending that trademark.

      At the end of the day, it's a done deal. AOL have put time and money into ensuring they have a name that works from a legal standpoint. They aren't going to throw more money at the problem just to soothe some egos. For better or for worse, the name has been selected and will be sticking - and it's time for people on both sides to make the most of it, whether they like it or not.

      --
      ++ Say to Elrond "Hello.".
      Elrond says "No.". Elrond gives you some lunch.
    2. Re:Well you know what they say about publicity ... by theedge318 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Two thoughts:

      1. FirebirdSQL uses the name "firebird" for their project at sourceforge.net, so what will Mozilla Firebird use.(so far their are still using phoenix)

      2. As Ann says, there is no problem with them using Mozilla Firebird. Why can't the Mozilla Project say we will never shorten the name to "Firebird", as they initially said they would. That way the only confusion would be had during casual conversations.

      They can still use "Mozilla Firebird" and "Firebird Browser" name perfectly legally, so why don't the people at Mozilla do the upstanding thing and stop blocking on the issue, and just end the issue (I am very positive that Ann would be very happy with that solution). The Open source community shouldn't have to resort to Redmondesque legal tactics to resolve squabbles.

      --
      Sig Nazi- "No Sig for you, come back 1 year."
  2. Firebird: Car! by ashutoshsm · · Score: 2, Funny

    Ooops - nope - I guess they discontinued that, eh?

    --
    Sig-Na-Cher ... what's that?
    1. Re:Firebird: Car! by elh102 · · Score: 5, Funny

      Sorry to disappoint you, but Pontiac doesn't make the Firebird OR the Firebird Trans-Am anymore. Somewhere, David Hasselhof and Burt Reynolds are quietly weeping, mourning the passage of their valiant steeds.

      2002 was the last model year any of these cars were built. The same goes for the Chevy Camaro.

    2. Re:Firebird: Car! by Rick+the+Red · · Score: 2, Funny

      A buddy of mine who drove a Formula used to say "Trans-Ams are like hemmoroids; sooner or later every asshole gets one."

      --
      If all this should have a reason, we would be the last to know.
  3. New Names by benntop · · Score: 5, Funny

    I would be satisfied if Mozilla's new name was just "Not Internet Explorer".

    Methinks even more people would want to use it too.

    Using Not Internet Explorer 1.3...

    1. Re:New Names by Kaz+Riprock · · Score: 5, Funny

      But then we'd all have browsers that say "NIE!"....and there'd be the shrubbery....

      --
      Mordor...a magical, mythical land where women are more rare than dragons--but where every man would rather find a dragon
    2. Re:New Names by quantaman · · Score: 5, Funny

      I would be satisfied if Mozilla's new name was just "Not Internet Explorer".

      More like

      "I can't believe it's not Internet Explorer!" ...

      okay fortunatly I can believe it's not IE which is why I use it, and yes I do deserve to be savagely beaten for that pathetic attempt at humor, ahh well I only need to decieve 3 people...

      --
      I stole this Sig
    3. Re:New Names by varslot · · Score: 2, Funny

      We are the knights who say "NIE".

      --
      There arises from a bad and unapt formation of words a wonderful obstruction to the mind. (Francis Bacon)
    4. Re:New Names by timmyf2371 · · Score: 5, Funny

      My mother refuses to use Mozilla on her box, so I downloaded the IE theme - work's a treat.

      --

      Backup not found: (A)bort (R)etry (P)anic
    5. Re:New Names by ackthpt · · Score: 2, Funny
      I would be satisfied if Mozilla's new name was just "Not Internet Explorer".

      Well, they could have named it "Roc" then people could saye it, er, "Rocs"

      "What? Pun Police? Ok, I'll go quietly?"

      --

      A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
    6. Re:New Names by KDan · · Score: 4, Funny

      FINF

      Firebird Is Not Firebird...

      Daniel

      --
      Carpe Diem
    7. Re:New Names by drdink · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I don't think I agree with you fooling your mother into using Mozilla just because you like it better than IE. Let the end user choose. What happens when she goes to WindowsUpdate with her tricked out Mozila and it doesn't work? What happens when she goes to a site that says "This site requires Internet Explorer' and the site doesn't render properly?

      --
      Beware, Nugget is watching... See?
    8. Re:New Names by drdink · · Score: 2, Informative

      Well sir, you're the one "bashing someone" by calling me "moron" and telling me to "get a clue". Apparently it isn't possible to type http://windowsupdate.microsoft.com in the Mozilla URL bar? Apparently it isn't possible to follow a link on a website or in an e-mail that takes you to WindowsUpdate? Please think before you lash out at me.

      --
      Beware, Nugget is watching... See?
    9. Re:New Names by RedBear · · Score: 2, Insightful

      There are other reasons to "fool" a non-technical user into using Mozilla rather than IE, besides the "just because" reason. Like the fact that even in the most up-to-date versions of IE there dozens of possibly horrible exploits where simply navigating to the wrong web page could get your computer taken over, or your hard drive wiped (vis-a-vis the very recent huge hole in Microsoft's proprietary Java VM). Or are we supposed to let the ignorant user "choose" to run every executable e-mail attachment and do other dumb, dangerous things, just for the fun of it?

      Second point, how many users do you think are going to be visiting WindowsUpdate when they can't even tell the difference between Mozilla and IE? The mother would be highly unlikely to do such a thing at all, and most certainly not without assistance from the son. So "fooling" this person into using a more secure web browser does no real harm and helps keep her from damaging her computer inadvertently. On top of that, I've seen very few web sites lately that ever say they only support IE. Even if they do, they almost invariably work just fine with Mozilla now.

      I can't believe you got modded up for such a knee-jerk, non-thinking whine.

    10. Re:New Names by Bios_Hakr · · Score: 2, Informative

      I have Mozilla set as the default browser. If I click on the "Windows Update" icon in the start menu, it launches IE and then goes to windowsupdate.microsoft.com.

      There is no problem with setting Moz as the default browser.

      --
      I'd rather you do it wrong, than for me to have to do it at all.
  4. Apples & Oranges. by bdowne01 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I really don't understand why the ferocity of their defense of the "Firebird" name.

    One is a database.
    Another is a browser.
    It's also a car.

    Unless, like I read in another post... it's all about publicity to just get the "Firebird" name out there.

    Ah well.

    --
    -brain
    1. Re:Apples & Oranges. by Jahf · · Score: 2

      So the members of this group are "asses"?

      Asian trademarks aside, what do you think the Mozilla group would have done if a small SQL database had decide to adopt the name MozillaSQL?

      If Mozilla is going to keep the new name for its new browser ... the least these folks deserve is a little publicity. At the minimum it has gotten the word out enough that folks like myself who pay some attention but not a LOT of attention to OSS will not get the 2 projects confused.

      --
      It is more productive to voice thoughtful opinions (reply) than to judge (moderate) others.
    2. Re:Apples & Oranges. by Natal+VC · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Check out the article. Try typing in "firebird 1.5 installer".

      Would you ever type that into Google if you were looking for the "Firebird" car ? No, you wouldn't.

      You would however type that in if you were looking for an installer to the new firebird database server version that the Interbase/Firebird folks have been working on for months and months now.

      A month ago, you would have gotten a direct link to the IBPhoenix page which has download links to that server. Now you get : "Phoenix and Minotaur to be renamed Firebird and Thunderbird". Great.

      This free, open source software project doesn't have the $$$ for sponsored links. After a couple of months, their site 'll be buried in Phoenix links in Google.

      Great show of respect from the 'fellow' open source crowd...

    3. Re:Apples & Oranges. by jejones · · Score: 5, Informative
      Ironic that the thread has "Apples" in the title...

      Some years back (I think around 1999), Apple decided to name the ninth version of its operating system for the Macintosh "Mac OS9". Microware Systems Corporation went to court, as it had used the name "OS-9" for a family of soft real-time operating systems since 1980 and had trademarked the name (it still does, or rather RadiSys Corporation, which bought Microware in 2001, does)--and lost. The case was thrown out of court (both originally and on appeal), because the judge claimed there would be no confusion--even though

      • Both are operating systems.
      • A company called Ultrascience at one time sold OS-9/68000 for 68000-based Macintoshes.
      • If you look around on the net, just about everybody always calls "Mac OS9" "OS9," just as Ms. Harrison asserts people will call "Mozilla Firebird" just plain "Firebird."
      • To this day, Macintosh users still post questions on comp.os.os9.
      I hasten to add that I am not a lawyer, and don't play one on TV, and that all opinions and errors herein are my own and not necessarily those of any organization.
    4. Re:Apples & Oranges. by patSPLAT · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It causes confusion for these two particular projects to share the same name.

      I build intranet websites. I use the Firebird browser to visit said websites. I use the Firebird database to build said websites. The important part: these two components are parts of an overall intranet solution. From the POV of a businessman, they merge into the same thing.

      Now, when explaining technology choices to that businessman, I get to dance around "Firebird the database" and "Firebird the browser". When installing software for that businessman, I have to ensure they don't mangle the "c:\Program Files\Firebird" directory.

      It's confusing, silly, and avoidable.

    5. Re:Apples & Oranges. by Grab · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Suppose Mozilla had renamed their browser "emacs" or "vi". Would that get your attention?

      Or is it only rude to do something like this to a more minor project which hasn't got the same publicity, and when you've got all AOL's dollars behind you?

      Picking this name was not the problem. Picking this name *after* doing a name search and ignoring the pre-existing project, *and* copping a "fuck-you" attitude when asked to play nicely, now that's the problem...

      Grab.

    6. Re:Apples & Oranges. by RestiffBard · · Score: 4, Insightful

      um, use google much? just add the word "browser" or "database". clears things up.

      --
      - /* dead coders leave no comments */
    7. Re:Apples & Oranges. by stephenb · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I think they were referring to the part of the interview where she says that a small minority of their userbase were being dicks about the whole thing, and she assumed everybody would just be polite in their email campaign. So the comment is not directed at ALL firebird DB users, just that small fringe group that she herself mentioned.

  5. Sounds like a win-win... by wwalker98 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    ...both parties get some run and no one gets hurt.

  6. sounds like they're just whining by Wakkow · · Score: 2, Offtopic

    The tone of the article, to me, sounds like they're just whining. I'm not convinced that having a browser named Phoenix will harm them. Either way, I undestand them wanting Mozilla to choose a new name, but the steps they've taken seem very unprofessional.

    Feel free to try and convince me.. I'm curious what others think.

    1. Re:sounds like they're just whining by HiThere · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I'm not sure that "Mozillazine" is a place to get much decent coverage of the situation, but...

      "Whining"... neither of us heard anybody's tone of voice, so this almost *has* to be projection. Perhaps what you really meant was that they didn't have a reasonable complaint? I can easily believe that they don't have a legally actionable complaint, but that doesn't keep the browser team from having exhibited very poor manners. Was it that they didn't bother to check that there was another project using the same name, or did they just not care?

      When a corporation acts like this, I consider them a bad citizen, and usually consider boycotting their products. Since I wasn't using Phoenix anyway, this isn't going to have much effect. But being in a legally defensible position doesn't translate into being a decent group of people. And OSS project or not, I find myself quite dubious as to the ethical standards of those in charge of determining the name. OSS goes a long way, but it doesn't justify everything, and claim-jumping (the closest analogy I can come to) is one thing it doesn't justify.

      If this turns out to be Mozilla rather than just Phoenix, well: "I've been wondering how one would hook a bayesian filter up to K-Mail, and I guess that I'll have a chance to find out. And thank you for having introduced me to Bayesian filters before turning to the dark side.", but for the moment I'm going to assume that it's only the Phoenix project that's involved. They're the only ones legally required to change their name.

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
  7. I'm empathetic... by Yoda2 · · Score: 2, Insightful
    While most Slashdot users won't be confused by a Firebird DB & a Firebird browser, many browser end-users might be.

    More importantly, it will just make all the geek headlines messy. You'll see an update on freshmeat and have to double-check which product it is for.

    1. Re:I'm empathetic... by Lumpy · · Score: 3, Funny

      While most Slashdot users won't be confused by a Firebird DB & a Firebird browser, many browser end-users might be.

      yeah... I can see it...

      "Dammit, this stupid firebird browser sucks. I can find any web pages on it.."

      tech support: " do you have your proxy set wrong?"

      "No, it keeps telling me my query is wrong and I need to select a database first! this this is pure crap!"

      I can see that... same as those idiots in sales keep trying to piss in the vending machines because they are the same color as the urinal stalls. And dont get me started what they do because the odor cakes in the urinals look like a favorite food around here!

      People are so fricking stupid nowdays you have to be careful because names easily confuse them.

      Ok so was a too sarcastic?

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
  8. Stupid Name Anyway by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    C'mon, "Firebird"? Come up with something better, all of you!

  9. Re:This'll teach em by Jason1729 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Those database people should've never named their program the same thing as the browser

    They should have never named it after the car and then expected that nobody would do the same to them.

    Jason
    ProfQuotes

  10. Users by flynt · · Score: 3, Insightful

    And I've spent most of the last week responding to people who read about this on Slashdot and call me a spammer, a terrorist, and a sucker of moose balls.

    Whose users are being asses again?

    1. Re:Users by stratjakt · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Basically, because the users of Firebird object. Our users develop applications based on Firebird and other open source components. That's their bread and butter. When they say that something will damage them, I have an obligation to respond.

      It's not the Firebird(DB) users, they have a legitimate problem with something which is going to confuse their potential clients, and possibly damage their projects/businesses. All because noone on the mozilla team could think up anything more clever than "Firebird".

      I mean, jeez, cant they just say "Oh, Firebird is taken... Lets call it Miata or Boxter or Webmangler".

      --
      I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
  11. Getting the priorties straight by sssmashy · · Score: 3, Funny

    Consider Anne's Responses:

    Q: Several sites, including LinuxWorld, News.com, Slashdot and Neowin.net have published articles on the conflict. How do you feel about the media coverage of the dispute?

    A: "To be frank, I haven't read any of the articles. I've got a mangled database I'm trying to resurrect and I've been answering e-mails from people who object to my attempt to raise our profile."

    and yet, Anne admits:

    "And I've spent most of the last week responding to people who read about this on Slashdot and call me a spammer, a terrorist, and a sucker of moose balls."

    Glad to see she has her priorities straight. She's been too busy responding to the flames of Slashdot readers to read any of the other articles on the conflict... ;-)

    1. Re:Getting the priorties straight by Lumpy · · Score: 3, Funny

      "And I've spent most of the last week responding to people who read about this on Slashdot and call me a spammer, a terrorist, and a sucker of moose balls."

      Whoever came up with the moose balls email to her please stand up....

      You da Man!

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
  12. This smacks familiar by dledeaux · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Quote:

    Trademark law distinguishes a number of categories of use. A dry cleaner could call itself Apple Cleaners without conflict, but a computer called the Appel McIntosh would be a violation. Software is a category. Browsers, databases, compilers, etc. are all part of the software category.


    This reminds me of the disputes over domain names. Like whether Nissan motors vs Nissan computers has any more right to nissan.com than the other.

    I believe in the first come first serve. Mozilla needs to find a new name.
  13. Still like my name idea better by SuperBanana · · Score: 4, Funny

    I still think Mozilla should take a clue from the automotive world, and call it what everyone else calls the Pontiac Firebird(the Screaming/Flaming Chicken- remember the giant decal on the hood?), only with the typical Mozilla twist.

    "Introducing Screaming Dinosaur 7.0! Now features a Mullet theme(complete with AC/DC soundtrack) and optional CinderBlock technology, which completely disables the browser(but leaves it on your desktop, along with dozens of useless old documents and applications.)"

    1. Re:Still like my name idea better by rodgerd · · Score: 2, Funny

      Naw. Take a cue from the cartoon - you had Godzilla and his lil cousing Godzooky. What's wrong with Mozilla and Mozooky?

      Ready made theme tune and everything...

  14. tyranny of the majority by Dave+Burbank · · Score: 2, Insightful

    "As always, a small group of users are being real asses about the whole thing. Yay."

    - CmdrTaco, advocating the tyranny of the majority since 2003.

    1. Re:tyranny of the majority by RollingThunder · · Score: 2, Insightful

      He never said -whose- users are being asses, did he?

      IMO, there's a small group of users [b]from both projects[/b] being asses, and the rest of the people are going "Christ, get over yourselves, one's a browser the others a database."

  15. Re:Thank God by dmp95 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If ignorance is bliss, you must be quite happy. Many of us who actually develop against multiple databases for a living are actually familiar with Firebird the database. I think that the Mozilla people are doing a shitty thing and that they should back off and find another name. The people behind firebird have done some decent work, now why don't the rabid /.'s back off and show some respect for a solid open source project?

  16. How does it hurt them? by papasui · · Score: 2, Insightful

    After reading the article I fail to see which aspect of the browser being called Firebird negatively hurts them? Maybe they just want to be the top hits in a search engine and are afraid that the browser Firebird might steal that glory? Maybe they should just call it 'Phirebird' since Phoenix starts with a PH anyways and then it wouldn't piss them off but it would probably piss someone else off. You just can't make everyone happy so why bother trying.

  17. But why... by frodo+from+middle+ea · · Score: 2, Insightful

    But why did mozilla team pickup the name firebird ? I am preety sure they knew about the firebird database.
    So why firebird ? I mean why create a controversy even if it's legal.
    For 's sake, how difficult is it to come up with a name . Why not just call it mozilla-lite ?

    --
    for the last time people, I am "frodo from middle eaRTH", not "middle eaST".
  18. "Firebird" is a dumb name for a browser... by _xeno_ · · Score: 5, Interesting
    Personally, I think Mozilla should change the name - not so much because FirebirdSQL was first, but because Firebird is a dumb name for a browser :)

    In keeping with the fire and lizard themes, how about "Salamander" for the browser?

    I think we need a /. poll on this issue - let the Slashdot croud weigh in! Here's my suggestion:

    Should Mozilla change Firebird's name?

    • Yes, Firebird (the database) was first
    • Yes, Firebird's a car, not a browser
    • No, Firebird Browser and Firebird Database can coexist
    • No, FirebirdSQL should forfeight the name
    • Who cares? I don't use either!
    • Name the browser CowboyNeal and the database Hemos
    --
    You are in a maze of twisty little relative jumps, all alike.
  19. Mozilla is losing mindshare by AirLace · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I've always been a Mozilla advocate. Mozilla's support for Web standards, tied with its open development cycle, powered by the remarkable bugzilla system made it immediately appeal to me. The legendary competition with MSIE is also a significant factor.

    But I've really lost faith in Mozilla since this Firebird naming issue came up. It's not that I feel some kind of cameraderie for the Firebird-db people, but out of my own selfishness. If Mozilla can appropriate the name of a prominent Open Source project's name, what's to stop it from doing so again? Perhaps my project is next on the chopping block? Backed with the lawyers of AOL, I have started to fear that the Mozilla project could come to threaten my Open Source project. Perhaps they'll chose to rename their IRC client next?

    When users apt-get install firebird, should they get the browser or the database? The only thing the "Firebird" name change is going to achieve is the dangerous precedent for an environment which encourages the free-for-all name grab; I know Mozilla advocates have stuck to their guns in the past on important issues, but they really need to give up the "Firebird" name. Please direct your guns towards the people who break Web standards and perpetuate broken software, not fellow Open Source projects, especially not for something as trivial as a stupid name. Life's just too short.

    1. Re:Mozilla is losing mindshare by BZ · · Score: 5, Informative

      > When users apt-get install firebird, should they
      > get the browser or the database?

      The database, since "Firebird" is a codename for the browser component of Mozilla and should not be applied to actual shipping products.

    2. Re:Mozilla is losing mindshare by BZ · · Score: 4, Informative

      I think I have a general idea of what I'm talking about with the Mozilla project... ;) The final shipping name of the browser component is not clear yet; it may well end up being "Mozilla Browser". But for now, we need distinct names for the new component and the existing app-suite, while the new component is being moved to.

  20. Now by mindstrm · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I know we all hate trademark disputes, and obviously, this isn't one.... but the principle is the same.
    It's this kind of thing that the concept of trademark was DESIGNED to deal with, exacty: 2 things in the same field with the same name.

    Oh, but a browser isn't a database tool? Trademark law recognizes software as a class unto itself.

    Just like if someone named their dump truck "firebird". Pontiac could have a fit... it's still a vehicle, even if the use case & market is different.

    So... as a community, how do we solve the issue?

  21. Which is more similar? by cperciva · · Score: 5, Funny

    Which pair is more similar, a web browser and a database, or a web browser and a BIOS?

    It seems to me that this name change had nothing to do with trademark law or avoiding confusion, and everything to do with who has the most lawyers.

    Personally, I think that the Firebird database should be renamed the Mozilla database... because, hey, Mozilla's own lawyers (ok, AOL's lawyers, presumably) have obviously decided that nobody will ever be confused between a web browser and a database.

    1. Re:Which is more similar? by BZ · · Score: 4, Informative

      > Which pair is more similar, a web browser and a
      > database, or a web browser and a BIOS?

      Phoenix Software also makes a browser for embedded systems. As in, their BIOS is no the only product in their product line.

      See the second bullet point at http://www.phoenix.com/en/solutions/connect/firstv iew+connect/firstview+connect+2.1/default1.htm

      So what's more similar, eh? A web browser and a database, or a web browser and a web browser?

  22. Yay? by sevensharpnine · · Score: 5, Interesting

    And what type of editorializing would we have if some no-name database project stole the name of an established browser? Just because you like the phoenix/firebird project doesn't automatically make them right.

    If they want to maintain clarity, all of the established firebird developers now have the wonderful repsonsibility of qualifying their projects as firebird-db or somesuch nonsense because the phoenix team picked a name for their software that was already taken.

    I can't understand if this naming issue is just some publicity stunt or if the moz developers are really this oblivious to the inconvenience they're causing. I would expect this sort of insane behavior from a pair of firms with an over-imaginative PR departments trying to brand themselves. But watching this shit come from open-source developers? Depressing.

    --
    "God is a comedian playing to an audience too afraid to laugh." -Voltaire
  23. Firebird name recognition by djg0005 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I found out about this name change earlier this morning as I was looking to change my Phoenix theme. I found that they have made the switch at the main theme site for Pho ... er ... Firebird here. When performing a search on the new name on Google, I found nothing about the Mozilla based browser, but I did find sites about a database I had never heard of before and my first car (1983 pontiac firebird). The results can be found here . Further investigation led me to the Mozilla homepage where the announcement is posted here. It seems that Phoenix Technologies (A BIOS manufacturer) has an embedded browser for some digital systems. Let's hope they don't have to change the name once again due to a few angry users who may become confused when they attempt to open their browser and a database opens instead.

    dan

  24. I don't think so by Cthefuture · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Now, I'd never heard of the Firebird database before this. However, from what I can tell their database is called Firebird. Just "Firebird", not FirebirdSQL as others have suggested. So both the database and browser are called exactly the same thing.

    Also, while it's true they are two completely different applications, they are both software that you run on your computer. That's too close for comfort. What does "Are you using Firebird?" mean exactly (could be database, or it could mean the browser).

    With that said, when you use something so obvious as Firebird for the name of your application, you damn well better get a trademark or something because you should just assume zillions of others will think of using the same name. This was a mistake the database people made, for sure.

    So, I think the Phoenix group is probably legally safe, but the nice thing to do would be to pick another name. I know they don't want to do this because it means more lawyer fees and coming up with yet another name. I dunno... They don't have to do this and it doesn't look like they are. In which case if I were the Firebird database people then I would come up with another name and trademark it (as painful as that may be). It's not like it was a database being used by 100's of thousands of people and they will now all be confused by the name change.

    --
    The ratio of people to cake is too big
    1. Re:I don't think so by demonlapin · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Not to mention that they're both open-source applications; imagine the possible confusion if you mentioned that your database product with a standardized browser interface "uses open-source Firebird technology to provide a powerful, responsive interface to your data."

      There's a real possibility of confusion there, and the Moz folks probably ought to get moving if they want to be good neighbors.

      For those who insist on using the car analogy: do you think GM would sit by if Ford introduced the all-new 4WD Ford Firebird SUV?

    2. Re:I don't think so by DarkZero · · Score: 2, Insightful

      With that said, when you use something so obvious as Firebird for the name of your application, you damn well better get a trademark or something because you should just assume zillions of others will think of using the same name. This was a mistake the database people made, for sure.

      Trademarking the name wouldn't have mattered. In the eyes of the law, a browser and a database are probably just as far apart as a car and a plane. Sure, they're the same thing in an extremely general sense, like "software" and "vehicles", but in actuality, they are very different. They are not, metaphorically, sold on the same shelf. They perform completely different tasks for different markets and that means that they can both coexist peacefully.

      The only reason people think that trademarks are such overwhelmingly powerful things that give you total control over a name in all areas of business is because of how easy it is to steal domain names and such away from people through third parties that have nothing to do with the law, such as ICANN. In legal practice, trademarks aren't really that broad, and this is a legal matter.

    3. Re:I don't think so by mindstrm · · Score: 2, Informative

      Trademarking would ABSOLUTEY have mattered; SOFTWARE is a category in trademark law. There is no distinction for different types of software.

    4. Re:I don't think so by Rick+the+Red · · Score: 5, Insightful

      They have a trademark. It's "Firebird." They haven't registered it, but it's still a legal, defensible trademark.

      --
      If all this should have a reason, we would be the last to know.
    5. Re:I don't think so by zurab · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Trademarking the name wouldn't have mattered. In the eyes of the law, a browser and a database are probably just as far apart as a car and a plane. Sure, they're the same thing in an extremely general sense, like "software" and "vehicles", but in actuality, they are very different.

      Dude, this is a very good example to prove exactly the opposite of your argument. There are many car manufacturers that are also in the airplane industry. Even for the ones that are not, does not automatically enable anyone to take their trademarks and use them to name their planes. Saab makes both cars and airplane parts and engines. So does Rolls Royce; and many others. Toyota is/was planning to make an easy-to-fly, cheap plane. I can't take "Saab" or "Toyota" trademarks and use them with my planes names. And, no I can't name my planes "Mercedes", "BMW" or "Volvo" either.

      That said, in the article, they address this question - in legal terms, the article says, there is a software category that covers all software. Mozilla could, in theory, apply for and register a trademark on "Firebird" claiming to only use it in a very specific narrow field, but otherwise it is likely to be violating the database project's trademark.

      In my opinion, this makes sense. Going beyond the cars and airplanes, if Firebird database project were to produce a database browser and integrated products for web services on top of their database, etc. that would cause more confusion than a simple - "ahh anybody can tell a difference between DB and a browser" - may suggest.

      The only reason people think that trademarks are such overwhelmingly powerful things that give you total control over a name in all areas of business is because of how easy it is to steal domain names and such away from people through third parties that have nothing to do with the law, such as ICANN. In legal practice, trademarks aren't really that broad, and this is a legal matter.

      Well, trademarks don't give you power "in all areas of business"; as I understand there are defined categories for trademark use and laws on what can and cannot constitute a trademark. This has nothing to do with ICANN and their practices, or domain names even.

  25. Why fight so hard to keep the name? by truthsearch · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Since calling it Firebird is a recent change, why not just pick another name if it's becoming such a big deal? Any particular reason to stick with the name Firebird for Mozilla other than the fact it's already been publicized? If they're getting so much heat from it, I think they should just pick another name right now and end this.

    1. Re:Why fight so hard to keep the name? by Yort · · Score: 4, Interesting
      why not just pick another name if it's becoming such a big deal?

      Easy - my guess would be money. Given that their first name landed them in legal hot water, they had to plead with the Mothership to have the lawyers do a lot of footwork to make sure the next name was legal. Legal, mind you, not "nice."

      Odds are not good that they'll change it, 'cuz that will take more money (something AOL isn't really rolling with these days). It's unfortunate that all this happened - fwiw, I don't think the Mozilla team was intentionally obtuse about it, but what's done is done and they can't really do anything now. Hopefully they'll be more considerate of smaller fish next time.

      That said, I agree that Firebird is kind of a dumb name for a broswer. There didn't seem to be as much trouble picking "Camino" or even "Safari" for other browsers...

    2. Re:Why fight so hard to keep the name? by jerryasher · · Score: 4, Funny

      Firebi~2

    3. Re:Why fight so hard to keep the name? by !splut · · Score: 2, Funny

      Any particular reason to stick with the name Firebird for Mozilla other than the fact it's already been publicized?

      Aw, geez, but they already made up T-shirts and coffee mugs...

      But seriously, maybe I misread something back there, but I believe it is Mozilla's streamlined standalone-browser project, Phoenix, that is going through a namechange to Firebird, not Mozilla itself.

      -ks

      --
      The angel in the oatmeal.
  26. the database people are right by jd142 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Read the article. Think about it. They were using the name first for a software product. The Mozilla people should have done their homework. AOL's lawyers should have done their homework. Doing a quick google even points you to a whole heirarchy of sites devoted to the software ( Computers > Software > Databases > InterBase ).

  27. Why do I feel like... by fobbman · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ...if some small, yet popular open-source project had its name stolen by a large, monolithic software company's product that we'd be all over the larger company's ass about this?

  28. suggested name change by frovingslosh · · Score: 3, Funny

    Perhaps with all the heated argument over the name, the Mozilla browser should not be called Firebird but rather it should be named Flamethrower.

    --
    I'm an American. I love this country and the freedoms that we used to have.
  29. Re:1 name can ref to more then one person by jd142 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Ahh, I see you didn't read the article at all. To quote Ann Harris from the article, "The Firebird BBS project from Taiwan uses "Firebird BBS" as their mark. Pontiac uses "Pontiac Firebird" as a mark. If Mozilla wants to use "Mozilla Firebird" -- that may be acceptable in a legal sense."

    Also, if you read the article, you'd know that software is the entire category. That's why the Linux, as the sole name of a word processor, is out of the question, no matter what os it ran on.

  30. Re:There is only one Firebird by Skip+Inrechorde · · Score: 3, Funny
    Just like there's only one Thunderbird.

    E & J Gallo Thunderbird.

  31. New name by Webmonger · · Score: 4, Funny

    Just call the browser "Flamewar".

  32. Re:This'll teach em by lactose99 · · Score: 5, Funny

    Maybe we should call the new lightweight Moz browser Pinto.

    --
    Fully licensed blockchain psychiatrist
  33. Name Idea by hendridm · · Score: 3, Interesting

    How about calling it "Mozilla" or "Mozilla Browser". There's no conflict with that name, right?

  34. Many Similarities... by phyxeld · · Score: 4, Funny

    Phoenix, the lightweight opensource mozilla browser, was renamed to Firebird.
    Firebird, the open source database, is supported by a company called IBPhoenix.
    Firebird, the database, also happens to be licensed under the IPL, which is based on the Mozilla Public License.

    The Mozilla Project's Asa Dotzler has said that "the chances of someone confusing a web browser and a relational database are about as slim as someone confusing a loaf of bread and a bananna". There have now been complaints from Mozilla camp about IBPhoenix inciting their users to contact, en masse, Asa (and others) about this matter... I think that the Mozilla people should really just be glad that the users were only asked to send email, rather than to snail mail packages of mozilla-branded banana bread. Because that would be kind of funny.

    In any case, I think that a project who's name and logo comes awfully close to infringing on a certain Japaneese movie franchise really ought to think carefully before stepping on friend's toes regarding name rights.

    --
    __
    Choose mnemonic identifiers. If you can't remember what mnemonic means, you've got a problem. - Larry Wall
  35. J.A.B.B.O.C. by SomeOtherGuy · · Score: 2, Funny

    It's just another browser based on gecko. I think all of these offshoots should be named with some string of numbers that is the sum of RAM required + the amount of diskspace in K) + version nbr / the square root of the number of text editors for Linux * the number of failed office suites + 1.

    --
    (+1 Funny) only if I laugh out loud.
  36. Synonyms? by White+Roses · · Score: 2, Interesting
    What about some of the synonyms that are readily available?

    I like Purity and Archetype as browser names. But Humdinger would be funny, as it's one of those words that sounds vaguely pornographic but isn't. Paragon would also be good. In fact, I think I might change my browser to report itself as Paragon.

    --
    Do not touch -Willie
  37. As a user of both pieces of software.. by Outland+Traveller · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I appreciate both teams. Mozilla was the little gecko engine that could, that never gave up and eventually plodded to stability. Mozilla is one of the most successful open source projects today and a major bastion against a microsoft-locked internet.

    FirebirdSQL was born from Borland's utter mismanagement of Interbase. The only reason they didn't kill the product outright is because of the great user community. Only a determined and personally involved user community has salvaged the interbase code from years of neglect to a very respectable open source database system. Firebird
    is the leading developer of the interbase code today, eclipsing borland's own efforts in many areas. It is every bit as competitive a system as mysql and postgresql.

    Both products clearly deserve respect and admiration. Anyone who disparages the core accomplishments of either group would be hard pressed to do better.

    This makes the current scandal all the more sad. I think everyone who has ever seen a news group or a major mailing list understands the need for good etiquette on the net.

    Regardless of the legal issues, it is bad etiquette for the mozilla folks to rename phoenix firebird. Of course the Mozilla folks *can* use phoenix, but it's not very nice. There's plenty of name space for everyone.. Be a good neighbor and pick a non-conflicting name. This is social skills 101, a total no-brainer- Don't alienate people for no good reason.

    The Firebird (SQL) users should publicly appologize for advocating such guerilla protest tactics. I saddens me that many people's first impression of this great project will be formed from the emotional rantings of a minority. Do protest publicly, but do so with logic and reason.

    I hope this all blows over quickly.

  38. Wait, there's got to be a conspiracy here... by Infonaut · · Score: 2, Insightful
    As always, a small group of users are being real asses about the whole thing.

    This little dust-up makes me think of the clashes we're always reading about: Microsoft v. Oracle, HP v. Dell, and so on. Slashdot readers are continually ridiculing large corporations for their seemingly stupid behavior.

    Yet here we have a perfect example of how even a small group of people can do stupid things. Corporations are just collections of people, with their own ideas, egos and goals.

    The next time you want to shout at Google for becoming "The Man" just remember that getting even a small group of people to act with grace and common sense can be extremely difficult.

    --
    Read the EFF's Fair Use FAQ
  39. They know... by inertia187 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    This naming problem was obviously known very early on. The Type 4 JDBC driver is officially called JayBird to avoid problems with the Borland Type 3 and 4 driver named InterClient. But the actual JDBC driver class is called org.firebirdsql.jdbc.FBDriver. If everyone in the project umbrella could have agreed from the beginning, this might not have happened.

    Good or bad, they have their publicity.

    --
    A programmer is a machine for converting coffee into code.
  40. Re:To those making the point about the Pontiac F-b by thesolo · · Score: 2, Insightful

    To most everyone out there, a database and a browser aren't that much different, they are both just "computer programs." While a mechanic could probably say a car and truck are vastly different doesn't mean that's how everyone sees it.

    Yes, but they ARE vastly different computer programs. Your comparison of a car & a truck would be like comparing a small web browser to a large web browser; they both do the same thing, in the same space. To make your comparison more apt, you'd have to compare the firebird sports car to a jumbo jet. That's much closer to how different the phoenix browser is from the phoenix database.

  41. Salamander is a great name by frostman · · Score: 2, Interesting

    In keeping with the fire and lizard themes, how about "Salamander" for the browser?

    That's brilliant! And really much better than Firebird. Putting out fires, being immune to fire (to flames?), etc. - things you actually want in a browser! Plus the obvious flexibility of an amphibian...

    Here's a little quote about the etymology:
    Newts and Salamanders
    Newts and salamander have also been associated with evil and mischief. Salamanders have been linked to fire as far back as the times of Aristotle (384-322 BCE.); the word salamander is of Greek origin, and translates roughly to "Fire-Lizard". It was believed that salamanders were immune to fire, and could extinguish fire with skin secretions. In 1607, Edward Topsel published the book The History of Four-Footed Beasts and Serpents, which, along with illustrations of newts and salamanders resembling serpents and dragons, hypothesizes about the ability of salamanders to extinguish fire, receive nourishment from fire, and pass through fire unscathed. This leads to the origin of the of the vernacular name, Fire Salamander, given to the species Salamandra salamandra.

    - Amphibian Folklore

    --

    This Like That - fun with words!

  42. bandwagon +=1; by aoteoroa · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I'm going to jump on this bandwagon.

    Firebird is an excellent mature database that has continually improved since the project formed a few years ago,and is worth considering any time you want support for stored procedures, triggers, and transactions like PostgreSQL, or the ability to deploy on both Linux and Windows like mySQL.

    Mozilla is a great project with much more visibility than Firebird. It would be nice if the Mozilla team could spend a little extra time to come up with a name that isn't already being used by an open source project. How hard could that be?

  43. Namespace Crowding by 4of12 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    This is going to be more and more of a problem as time goes on, just because there's a limited supply of desirable and pronouncable names. Plus, the names that are registered trademarks keep getting deleted from the permissible set of assigned names.

    If cars and pharmaceuticals are any indication, software should start to use generated names that are still suggestive of desirable traits.

    From what I understand, big money is paid to come up with names like Viagra.

    To give you an idea of all the pitfalls. I recall hearing that the Chevrolet Nova was less than a hot selling vehicle in the Hispanic market because "no va" means, well, "no go", not exactly the best name for your next car.

    Pretty soon the only names left are going to be a.out and install.exe .

    --
    "Provided by the management for your protection."
    1. Re:Namespace Crowding by ziriyab · · Score: 2, Informative
      I recall hearing that the Chevrolet Nova was less than a hot selling vehicle in the Hispanic market because "no va" means, well, "no go", not exactly the best name for your next car.

      Well, your recall and hearing may be fine, but your story is apocryphal. :)

      See http://www.snopes.com/business/misxlate/nova.htm

  44. Phoenix's New Name is an Acronym by sethadam1 · · Score: 5, Funny

    Few people realize that the Phoenix browser's new name is an acronym:

    Firebird: I Renamed Everrbody's Browser Into a Relational Database

  45. Mozilla should have thought it through... by EverDense · · Score: 2, Insightful

    At the moment, if you go to Google, type in "Firebird" and click the "I'm Feeling Lucky" button.
    Currently the Firebird database page is displayed (http://firebird.sourceforge.net/)

    If in the future I type in "Firebird", click the "I'm Feeling Lucky" button and a Mozilla
    page is displayed, then they have done a major disservice to another open source project.
    By making it harder to find information about the Firebird DB, they will have eaten into its
    potential client base.

    --
    http://jesus.everdense.com/
  46. This is quite true... but somewhat misleading by FredFnord · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You are right in many of the particulars of the case, while, I think, being somewhat wrong in your conclusions.

    First of all, they started calling their system software releases 'MacOS Number' at MacOS 8. The moniker had been used before then; though 7 was still officially 'System 7', a lot of people referred to it as MacOS 7 or 7.5 or whatever, because 'System 7' couldn't be used unless you had a context... it's too broad. Likewise it's not patentable.

    Second, the Macintosh operating systems after 7.x were always called, not Mac OS9, but 'MacOS 9'. The dramatic majority of sites, based on a little check I just did via Google, do indeed call it that way. In fact, if you run a search for the following on Google, the top 8 sites you get are sites that talk about the OS-9 operating system, not the Macintosh in any way, shape, or form.

    "OS 9" "OS9" -"MacOS 9" -"Mac OS9"

    So, the pages that talk about OS-9 are, by and large, pages that talk about OS-9. In fact, I, as a Mac programmer and sysadmin, have very rarely heard of people calling MacOS 9 'OS-9'... I can't think of a single instance. When people are talking about it without bringing up the Mac beforehand, it's always 'MacOS 9'... when you're already talking about the Mac, it's almost *invariably* just 'nine'. As in, "Well, it runs under ten just fine, but it just crashes to the desktop when you try to run it on nine. I even tried it on nine-two-two.'

    Ultrascience did indeed sell OS-9 for 68000-based Macintoshes. However, by the time MacOS 9 came out, Ultrascience had discontinued their product quite a long time hence, so there was no danger of their being harmed.

    Finally, I have not read the decision, but as I understand it the judge didn't have to claim that there would be no confusion. What he needed to claim was that that Apple's trademark was sufficiently different from OS-9 that such confusion was unlikely to occur, OR that the two products were in sufficiently different categories that they did not compete with one another.

    Personally, I would have to say that anyone who needed OS-9 would be able to understand the difference between the two, and that therefore the judge was absolutely correct. Especially since OS-9 was treading on pretty thin ground as it was... it is hard to see how 'OS-9' was defensible, in a lot of ways. It is, and was, a generic industry term IN THE INDUSTRY IN WHICH IT IS REGISTERED, followed by a number that sounds very much like a version number. It would be kind of like me suggesting that I should be able to make 'OS/2' a trademark... oh... wait... uh, a better example might be 'DB/2'... oh, no... uh...

    It's just dumb. It's like... say you open a restaurant called 'Sam's BBQ'. It's popular, and you open another one across town called 'Sam's BBQ 2' Only you find out that someone else has a trademark on 'BBQ-2'. Taking a common and accepted generic term and adding a number to it is a questionable way to create a trademark. At best.

    -fred

    --
    Sign #11 of Slashdot overdose: You see the phrase 'moderate Republican' and you wonder if that would be a +1 or a -1.
  47. Re:Here is a reply to my e-mail from Ann and Paul by squiggleslash · · Score: 2, Insightful
    Ann's response looks perfectly reasonable to me. Indeed, it seems a little... unfair, to put it mildly, to accuse someone of trolling who's been accused of "terror" and is drafting a fairly reasonable and understandable reply.

    I find this whole episode extraordinary. AOL has no reason to use "Firebird". The name has been in use for so short a time virtually nobody has ever heard of it who has heard of Phoenix. The name is already in use. AOL and the Mozilla team are not only wrong to refuse to consider a name change, but also in their initial refusal to speak to the IBPhoenix people, even after acknowledging the clash.

    I've never used Firebird, until this I'd never even heard of it. But these actions are so off the wall, so intragently unjustifiable and so remarkably anti-cooperation that I have no intention of using either Mozilla, Phoenix, or Netscape until they resolve this issue. And, as someone who maintains a substantial webapp relying heavily on Javascript and CSS, I say tough titties if Mozilla users are locked out because of something we haven't tested in Gecko-based environments. If they don't want to play by the rules of fair play and mutual cooperation, I don't intend to either.

    --
    You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
  48. I just wish they're hurry up and RELEASE... by Micah · · Score: 2, Insightful

    ... the freeking thing. I've been waiting for the next stable release to switch to it full time. It's always "any day now".

    Yes, I hope they change the name, but I'll take it however I can get it. :)

  49. Gecko? How about Browzilla? by axxackall · · Score: 2, Insightful
    Gecko? It's a name of the Engine, which applications are not limited to web-browsing, fortunately. Thus, keep Gecko for Engine.

    However, Mozilla itsef has already inspired several derivated names, such as Chatzilla (IRC), Bugzilla and Crockzilla. So, keep the tradition and rename Phoenix to Browzilla. Everybody will understand that it is a browser and it's a part of Mozilla project.

    Same way, call Mail application as Mailzilla. And don't forget about Addrezilla, Linkzilla and Compozilla.

    --

    Less is more !
    1. Re:Gecko? How about Browzilla? by mooman · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Gecko? It's a name of the Engine, which applications are not limited to web-browsing, fortunately.

      Well, you've kinda supported my point here. It's an "engine".. let's call it an "engine". And while it's not strictly for "browsing", it is just for rendering HTML:
      From the Mozilla FAQ:
      "Gecko (formerly Raptor) is the new HTML rendering engine in Mozilla."

      All I was proposing was calling it the "Gecko Engine"... And the Gecko browser in turn uses the Gecko Engine.
      There's already precedent for this exact model. I mean, picture the "Quake engine". Lots of "non-quake" games use the "Quake engine" and that doesn't seem to throw anyone for a loop... So lots of apps will use the "Gecko Engine", one of them being Gecko the browser....

      --
      In the Portland, Ore area and like card games? Check out: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/portlandgames/
  50. The logical step by Earlybird · · Score: 2, Funny

    The logical step now is for the Firebird project to rename their project to "Mozilla". It's only fair.