Re: the PostgreSQL Elephant - Mailing list pgsql-advocacy

>>They are using it because it's the community elephant.  They put it on
>>merchandise because it's the community elephant.
>
>
> Right, but they also use it as their primary logo. Imagine if red hat
> switched to using tux as its logo...

Egad would their be hell to pay ;)

>
>
>>Why would they change
>>it?
> so josh would feel better :-)

Before I get into this, please take note that I am only saying what I
say for the good of the project and I mean no slight against any member
commercial or otherwise.

However the reality is this:

PostgreSQL.Org and PgSQL, Inc. have some serious potential problems.

1. PostgreSQL the project uses the same logo as PostgreSQL, Inc.

Note the name there. This isn't SRA, or Command Prompt who also support
PostgreSQL. This is PostgreSQL, Inc. who also uses the same logo as
PostgreSQL.Org.

If PostgreSQL, Inc. does something wrong, bad, illegal, files for
bankruptcy, or anything that can cause legal liability -- the project
could suffer.

Try explaining to a judge that the PostgreSQL trademark, filed by
PostgreSQL, Inc. actually belongs to PostgreSQL.Org which is not a legal
entity although it was filed by PostgreSQL, Inc., but there is also the
PostgreSQL Advocacy 501 (pending) that also isn't the PostgreSQL project
but the papers says it is but who is PostgreSQL, Inc. again? Oh wait,
PostgreSQL, Inc. doesn't host, or provide any resources to
PostgreSQL.Org, that is Hub.Org...

But the major shareholder of Hub.org is also a major shareholder of
PostgreSQL, Inc. And PostgreSQL, Inc. is hosted on the same bandwidth,
and servers and PostgreSQL.Org.

The paper trail as they call it all leads back to PostgreSQL.Org being
a Open Source project run, owned and operated by PostgreSQL, Inc. Even
the products sold by PostgreSQL, Inc. on their website are all
PostgreSQL.Org swag and the money is processed by Hub.Org.

If somebody went after PostgreSQL, Inc., somebody would have to prove
that PostgreSQL.Org was not PostgreSQL, Inc. Who is going to do that
and how are they going to do it.

Think of Jboss or MySQL.

To be frank, I think many people are being fairly naive if they think
that having a commercial entity that contains the exact same name,
controls the assets of, takes money for and who also owns the trademark
of the name won't cause problems.

There has to be a clear distinction somehow that PostgreSQL, Inc. is not
PostgreSQL.Org. That distinction does not currently exist.

If nothing else there is bound to be significant confusion in the
marketplace. Confusion that I myself have had to spend time on multiple
occassions explaining. To prospective clients.

Again this is not a slight against PostgreSQL, Inc., Command Prompt and
PgSQL, Inc have a good working relationship for those who don't know.

I also know there is another California corporation that is advertising
and Postgres, Inc. as well.

Maybe I am being sensitive, but I just got done with a huge intellectual
property, lawyer laden pile of dung (that CMD won btw) that was
remarkably similar to this whole conversation.

Sincerely,

Joshua D. Drake













>
>
> Robert Treat


--
Command Prompt, Inc., home of Mammoth PostgreSQL - S/ODBC and S/JDBC
Postgresql support, programming shared hosting and dedicated hosting.
+1-503-667-4564 - jd@commandprompt.com - http://www.commandprompt.com
Mammoth PostgreSQL Replicator. Integrated Replication for PostgreSQL