Thread: the PostgreSQL Elephant
I'm just curious ... the thread about the flyers indicated that PHP adopted an elephant as well ... but, I just searched their site and find nothing to indicate such, other then one 'image' on an annoumcement for a PHP conference in Quebec that the elephant ... Searching 'PHP Logo' through google, I found: http://www.php.net/download-logos.php Which contains all of their standard ones, but nothing that contains an elephant ... So, where is this elusive PHP Elephant? ---- Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org) Email: scrappy@hub.org Yahoo!: yscrappy ICQ: 7615664
On Thursday 08 July 2004 23:45, Marc G. Fournier wrote: > I'm just curious ... the thread about the flyers indicated that PHP > adopted an elephant as well ... but, I just searched their site and find > nothing to indicate such, other then one 'image' on an annoumcement for a > PHP conference in Quebec that the elephant ... > > Searching 'PHP Logo' through google, I found: > > http://www.php.net/download-logos.php > > Which contains all of their standard ones, but nothing that contains an > elephant ... > > So, where is this elusive PHP Elephant? > > http://www.eprometeus.com/upload/SERVIZI3f1d280a1be45/php_elephant.gif I'm not positive this is the original one, but it's awefully close. The thing is that afaik this was never really made into an official mascot, it was just used by some people because the letters PHP look like an elephant. (first P is the trunk and ear, H is body and legs, last P is a leg and buttocks.... I see this but can never make out those hidden image pictures...go figure) Robert Treat -- Build A Brighter Lamp :: Linux Apache {middleware} PostgreSQL
People: > Which contains all of their standard ones, but nothing that contains an > elephant ... If the elephant is not an "official" logo, then it's a non-issue. -- -Josh Berkus Aglio Database Solutions San Francisco
On Fri, 9 Jul 2004, Josh Berkus wrote: > People: > >> Which contains all of their standard ones, but nothing that contains an >> elephant ... > > If the elephant is not an "official" logo, then it's a non-issue. Just checked Amazon, and the O'Reilly PHP book uses a bird: http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/1565926102/qid=1089417846/sr=1-5/ref=sr_1_5/103-3442116-8275826?v=glance&s=books bluejay, if I'm correct ... but nothing I can find on their official web site (except that one conference image) indicates any animal at all ... ---- Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org) Email: scrappy@hub.org Yahoo!: yscrappy ICQ: 7615664
>> If the elephant is not an "official" logo, then it's a non-issue. > > Just checked Amazon, and the O'Reilly PHP book uses a bird: > >http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/1565926102/qid=1089417846/sr=1-5/ref=sr_1_5/103-3442116-8275826?v=glance&s=books > > bluejay, if I'm correct ... > > but nothing I can find on their official web site (except that one > conference image) indicates any animal at all ... If there really is a potential confusion in people's minds at the conference about the PostgreSQL mascot then perhaps what is really needed is one of these with the PostgreSQL name on it handing out LiveCDs: http://www.funfolly.com/h/mascots/c1744.htm It's about $900 but perhaps the money could be raised by driving traffic from the mail lists to a paypal link on the pg site. If nothing else it would prove the PostgreSQL community has a sense of humor... :)
Fred Moyer wrote: > >> If the elephant is not an "official" logo, then it's a non-issue. > > > > Just checked Amazon, and the O'Reilly PHP book uses a bird: > > > >http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/1565926102/qid=1089417846/sr=1-5/ref=sr_1_5/103-3442116-8275826?v=glance&s=books > > > > bluejay, if I'm correct ... > > > > but nothing I can find on their official web site (except that one > > conference image) indicates any animal at all ... > > If there really is a potential confusion in people's minds at the > conference about the PostgreSQL mascot then perhaps what is really needed > is one of these with the PostgreSQL name on it handing out LiveCDs: > > http://www.funfolly.com/h/mascots/c1744.htm > > It's about $900 but perhaps the money could be raised by driving traffic > from the mail lists to a paypal link on the pg site. If nothing else it > would prove the PostgreSQL community has a sense of humor... :) That has to be the most ridiculous animal costume I have ever seen. :-) -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 359-1001 + If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073
On Friday 09 July 2004 18:33, Josh Berkus wrote: > People: > > Which contains all of their standard ones, but nothing that contains an > > elephant ... > > If the elephant is not an "official" logo, then it's a non-issue. However, the same blue elephant is used for some baby products. I'll have to check, but I have a stroller I purchased at Wal-mart that has 'our' elephant on it. I have been meaning to send a picture of it to people for awhile, more as a humor item than anything else. But, IANAL, so I don't know about logos in unrelated product areas being confused. -- Lamar Owen Director of Information Technology Pisgah Astronomical Research Institute 1 PARI Drive Rosman, NC 28772 (828)862-5554 www.pari.edu
Lamar, > However, the same blue elephant is used for some baby products. I'll have > to check, but I have a stroller I purchased at Wal-mart that has 'our' > elephant on it. I have been meaning to send a picture of it to people for > awhile, more as a humor item than anything else. But, IANAL, so I don't > know about logos in unrelated product areas being confused. It's not really an issue -- at least, up until some large holding corporation sponsors us, but we'll burn that bridge when we come to it. Logos, like trademarks (at least in the US) are considered contextual; for example, we'd have no claim on a baby food named "Postgres" if such an abomination should reach the market. And, despite being a semi-retired political activist, it never occurred to me about any confusion with the Republican Party. Partly because the two elephants are so different, and because the elephant is an obvious metaphor for our project -- particularly in contrast to the MySQL dolphin. Things in favor of the Blue Elephant Head (BEH): 1) We've been using it for about 4 years not and it's getting some recognition as our emblem; 2) It doesn't conflict with any other OSS project or database logo; 3) It's simple and easy to reproduce in a variety of sizes and on a variety of media, including t-shirts and stickers and 128-pixel web buttons. (this is a reason why I'd vote against the "elepant-diamond" or "elephant-breaking-through-wall" images. Problems with the Blue Elephant Head: 1) PostgreSQL Inc. is also using it as a company logo. This is obviously something we and they should have discussed an age ago; we'll have to deal with it now, I suppose. 2) It doesn't naturally flow into our name logo the way that, say, MySQL's dolphin does. The result is that the elephant head and the "PostgreSQL" end up being completely seperate objects on most designs. Difficulty of Switching to Something Else: 1) The BEH is already being widely recognized as "ours". This summer, we'll be distributing 2000 CDs and 100 T-shirts and I don't know how many flyers with the BEH on them. So even were we to adopt a different logo today, people would still think of the BEH and see it around for the next year or more. 2) Even if we switched to a different *design*, we should keep the elephant concept for the reasons mentioned above, and because switching animals/objects would really confuse people and make them think that we'd had a project fork or something. This would mean that we would need to seek new designs, as the Slony elephant is spoken for. Does anyone have a copy of the elephant designs Cornelia submitted last year? Overall, I'd prefer to stick with the BEH. We have too much other stuff to do to deal with a logo search and evaluation now. BUT, if we're even *contemplating* a new logo, we do *need* to do it now because a year from now the BEH will be really irremovable. -- Josh Berkus Aglio Database Solutions San Francisco
On Saturday 10 July 2004 14:53, Josh Berkus wrote: > Things in favor of the Blue Elephant Head (BEH): > 1) We've been using it for about 4 years not and it's getting some > recognition as our emblem; Nope. We've been using it on the website at least for only 2 years. And not quite two years; according to the WayBack Machine it first appeared in March, 2003, which is not even a year and a half. We used the other for at least as long. > 3) It's simple and easy to reproduce in a variety of sizes and on a variety > of media, including t-shirts and stickers and 128-pixel web buttons. > (this is a reason why I'd vote against the "elepant-diamond" or > "elephant-breaking-through-wall" images. This is quite true. > Problems with the Blue Elephant Head: > 1) PostgreSQL Inc. is also using it as a company logo. This is obviously > something we and they should have discussed an age ago; we'll have to deal > with it now, I suppose. They were, in fact, using it first. The WayBack Machine gives a pgsql.com page from August, 1999 with the BEH. http://web.archive.org/web/19990826121148/http://pgsql.com/ is the link. > Difficulty of Switching to Something Else: > 1) The BEH is already being widely recognized as "ours". This summer, > we'll be distributing 2000 CDs and 100 T-shirts and I don't know how many > flyers with the BEH on them. So even were we to adopt a different logo > today, people would still think of the BEH and see it around > for the next year or more. Probably more. I personally don't mind giving Marc and PostgreSQL, Inc, that sort of coverage. After all, they have done a great deal for PostgreSQL the project. However, trademark might become an issue, too. But that's something I really don't want to deal with; there are people far better equipped to deal with that sort fo question than I. > 2) Even if we switched to a different *design*, we should keep the > elephant concept for the reasons mentioned above, and because switching > animals/objects would really confuse people and make them think that we'd > had a project fork or something. This would mean > that we would need to seek new designs, as the Slony elephant is spoken > for. Does anyone have a copy of the elephant designs Cornelia submitted > last year? I'd like to see something like that. I did see an elephant logo for a hosting company in Linux Journal a couple of issues back, but it was red or orange. The elephant per se is definitely attached to us. > Overall, I'd prefer to stick with the BEH. We have too much other > stuff to do to deal with a logo search and evaluation now. BUT, if we're > even *contemplating* a new logo, we do *need* to do it now because a > year from now the BEH will be really irremovable. I think if the PgSQL Inc issue can be easily dealt with we should go with being the least confusing. I just personally prefer the diamond one; but that is just my preference. My preference and what is good for PostgreSQL do not need to agree. -- Lamar Owen Director of Information Technology Pisgah Astronomical Research Institute 1 PARI Drive Rosman, NC 28772 (828)862-5554 www.pari.edu
On Sat, 10 Jul 2004, Josh Berkus wrote: > Problems with the Blue Elephant Head: > 1) PostgreSQL Inc. is also using it as a company logo. This is obviously > something we and they should have discussed an age ago; we'll have to deal > with it now, I suppose. Note that all of this was discussed *years* ago, before most of you were around ... in fact, PostgreSQL, Inc wasn't even formed without it being discussed among, and approved by, core ... ---- Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org) Email: scrappy@hub.org Yahoo!: yscrappy ICQ: 7615664
Hi all > Does anyone have a copy of the elephant designs Cornelia submitted > last year? Look at http://postgresql.de, it's at the bottom of each page. Regards Conni
Conni, > Look at http://postgresql.de, it's at the bottom of each page. Hmmm ... problematic in the US. The "elephant in profile" is extensively used by the Republican Party. Other Americans? Do you think it would be confused? I also like the implication of using the Elephant's head rather than the whole elephant. The thought there is that we're focusing on one of the attributes of elephants -- that they "never forget" rather than that they are heavy, ponderous, or slow which the body implies. (and, per Theodore Geisel, "And elephant is faithful, one hundred percent.") Opinions? -- -Josh Berkus Aglio Database Solutions San Francisco
Josh Berkus wrote: > Conni, > > > Look at http://postgresql.de, it's at the bottom of each page. > > Hmmm ... problematic in the US. The "elephant in profile" is extensively > used by the Republican Party. Other Americans? Do you think it would be > confused? Every Republican elephant I have seen is red. -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 359-1001 + If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073
Marc, > Note that all of this was discussed *years* ago, before most of you were > around ... in fact, PostgreSQL, Inc wasn't even formed without it being > discussed among, and approved by, core ... Can you forward me the discussion, then? Because it was definitely a mistake for the project to adopt the same logo used by PostgreSQL Inc. (since you folks seem to have been using it first). Mostly I suspect that nobody was really thinking about marketing at all in those days. I think this means that we need to work on a new logo, post-haste. It's a little too late for the conventions this summer, but we'll need to change the logo ASAP after that. With all respect to Lamar and Jan, the elepant-diamond is not really feasable. It reproduces poorly at low resolutions or limited color palettes -- heck, even at high resolution it's a bit muddy. Frankly, a usable logo has to be draw-able on a cocktail napkin with a ball-point pen, or people will ignore it. Also, what would we be *saying* with an elephant in a diamond? Ideas, anyone? -- -Josh Berkus Aglio Database Solutions San Francisco
I also like the line drawing elephant on the top of the page at postgresql.de. --elein On Sun, Jul 11, 2004 at 07:46:29PM +0200, Cornelia Boenigk wrote: > Hi all > > > Does anyone have a copy of the elephant designs Cornelia submitted > > last year? > > Look at http://postgresql.de, it's at the bottom of each page. > > Regards > Conni > > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- > TIP 7: don't forget to increase your free space map settings
Josh Berkus wrote: > I think this means that we need to work on a new logo, post-haste. > It's a little too late for the conventions this summer, but we'll > need to change the logo ASAP after that. No way. We already have way too much marketing material and mindshare produced with the existing logo. Next someone claims we need to rename the project because some company has the same name. Yeah right. Are there any practical problems this creates? I don't think so.
On 7/11/2004 7:25 PM, elein wrote: > I also like the line drawing elephant on the top of > the page at postgresql.de. ... which reminds me of the little blue elephant from "Die Sendung mit der Maus". It's a German TV series for Kids that explains things. The speaker has a unique style of talking which makes it worth to copy it for jokes. Jan > > --elein > > On Sun, Jul 11, 2004 at 07:46:29PM +0200, Cornelia Boenigk wrote: >> Hi all >> >> > Does anyone have a copy of the elephant designs Cornelia submitted >> > last year? >> >> Look at http://postgresql.de, it's at the bottom of each page. >> >> Regards >> Conni >> >> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- >> TIP 7: don't forget to increase your free space map settings > > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- > TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command > (send "unregister YourEmailAddressHere" to majordomo@postgresql.org) -- #======================================================================# # It's easier to get forgiveness for being wrong than for being right. # # Let's break this rule - forgive me. # #================================================== JanWieck@Yahoo.com #
> With all respect to Lamar and Jan, the elepant-diamond is not really feasable. > It reproduces poorly at low resolutions or limited color palettes -- heck, > even at high resolution it's a bit muddy. Frankly, a usable logo has to be > draw-able on a cocktail napkin with a ball-point pen, or people will ignore > it. Also, what would we be *saying* with an elephant in a diamond? My take would be a new elephant but still an elephant. Use a slightly more dynamic color of blue. The soft blue (IMHO) is just too, blah. Basically and "updated" elephant. Every logo goes through a life cycle where they slightly change or color are slightly modified in the beginning of their life cycle. J > > Ideas, anyone? > -- 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
Attachment
Joshua D. Drake wrote: > Basically and "updated" elephant. Every logo goes through a life > cycle where they slightly change or color are slightly modified in > the beginning of their life cycle. Except that the beginning of this cycle was 4 years ago, and we have way too much invested with this logo now.
Peter,
> Except that the beginning of this cycle was 4 years ago, and we have way
> too much invested with this logo now.
According to Lamar, it was more like 20 months ago.
I take it, though, that you don't feel the conflict with the PostgreSQL, Inc.
Elephant is a problem?
--
-Josh Berkus
______AGLIO DATABASE SOLUTIONS___________________________
Josh Berkus
Enterprise vertical business josh@agliodbs.com
and data analysis solutions (415) 752-2387
and database optimization fax 651-9224
utilizing Open Source technology San Francisco
On Mon, 12 Jul 2004, Josh Berkus wrote: > Peter, > >> Except that the beginning of this cycle was 4 years ago, and we have way >> too much invested with this logo now. > > According to Lamar, it was more like 20 months ago. 20 months ago is still almost 2 years, nowhere near 'the beginning of the cycle' ... also, the main web site http://www.postgresql.org didn't get moved to the new elephant until the new web site was ready to go live ... the old site wasn't being touched during that period, so still had the *old* elephant on it (nobody wanted to make changes to the old site) ... ---- Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org) Email: scrappy@hub.org Yahoo!: yscrappy ICQ: 7615664
> > Except that the beginning of this cycle was 4 years ago, and we have way > too much invested with this logo now. A slightly modified elephant that is updated with a refreshed look is not going to hurt the project at all. It only has to be different enough to make a distinction between the commercial and non commercial elements. J -- 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
Attachment
Josh Berkus wrote: > I take it, though, that you don't feel the conflict with the > PostgreSQL, Inc. Elephant is a problem? There is no conflict. If a company calls itself PostgreSQL, Inc., then it will logically use the PostgreSQL elephant as its logo. If you feel there is a conflict then the conflict is really a company calling itself PostgreSQL, Inc. That was not particularly wise, but I don't really consider it a problem. But the logo is really a much smaller subset problem.
Peter, > There is no conflict. If a company calls itself PostgreSQL, Inc., then > it will logically use the PostgreSQL elephant as its logo. If you feel > there is a conflict then the conflict is really a company calling > itself PostgreSQL, Inc. That was not particularly wise, but I don't > really consider it a problem. But the logo is really a much smaller > subset problem. You missed part of Lamar's commentary: apparently the BEH logo belonged to PostgreSQL Inc. and we started using it, not the other way around. So the logo is theirs and we copied it. Which *definitely* wasn't smart. -- -Josh Berkus Aglio Database Solutions San Francisco
Josh Berkus wrote: > You missed part of Lamar's commentary: apparently the BEH logo > belonged to PostgreSQL Inc. and we started using it, not the other > way around. So the logo is theirs and we copied it. > > Which *definitely* wasn't smart. Yes, I know that. But that was then. Why is this a problem now?
On Mon, 2004-07-12 at 15:44, Josh Berkus wrote:
> Peter,
>
> > There is no conflict. If a company calls itself PostgreSQL, Inc., then
> > it will logically use the PostgreSQL elephant as its logo. If you feel
> > there is a conflict then the conflict is really a company calling
> > itself PostgreSQL, Inc. That was not particularly wise, but I don't
> > really consider it a problem. But the logo is really a much smaller
> > subset problem.
>
> You missed part of Lamar's commentary: apparently the BEH logo belonged to
> PostgreSQL Inc. and we started using it, not the other way around. So the
> logo is theirs and we copied it.
>
> Which *definitely* wasn't smart.
>
Maybe I missed this part, but what is the origin of the logo we
currently use? Ie. who wrote/drew it? where did they first submit it and
for what purpose? Lamar stated pgsql.inc started using it first, but
that doesn't mean it was designed for them. I see on the pgsql
propoganda page a button from Jeff MacDonald with the logo with the note
that he "Used Daniel's Elephant", which I believe refers to Daniel
Lundin, though I don't recognize that name. Note also that that page
indicates that those logo's are for the community, not the corporation,
which in essence would mean that the company has posted that the logo is
for the community.
Robert Treat
--
Build A Brighter Lamp :: Linux Apache {middleware} PostgreSQL
> that he "Used Daniel's Elephant", which I believe refers to Daniel > Lundin, though I don't recognize that name. Note also that that page > indicates that those logo's are for the community, not the corporation, > which in essence would mean that the company has posted that the logo is > for the community. I think the real problem is that while the community elephant and the postgresql, inc. elephant is the same, there is a unintended endorsement by the community to postgresql, inc. This is by no means a slam on postgresql, inc but it seems the community has always tried to be very business neutral and per Marc's own email the elephants should be different. 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
Attachment
On Mon, 12 Jul 2004, Joshua D. Drake wrote: >> that he "Used Daniel's Elephant", which I believe refers to Daniel >> Lundin, though I don't recognize that name. Note also that that page >> indicates that those logo's are for the community, not the corporation, >> which in essence would mean that the company has posted that the logo is >> for the community. > > I think the real problem is that while the community elephant and the > postgresql, inc. elephant is the same, there is a unintended endorsement by > the community to postgresql, inc. > > This is by no means a slam on postgresql, inc but it seems the community has > always tried to be very business neutral and per Marc's own email > the elephants should be different. Per my own email? Huh? I'm against changing something that we've worked >4 years on branding into ppl minds ... ---- Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org) Email: scrappy@hub.org Yahoo!: yscrappy ICQ: 7615664
The logo was originally designed to go onto the PostgreSQL Merchandise, as
the Diamond one just didn't print ... to be honest, I have no clue *when*
it was first used for other, either as Inc logo, or Project, but it has
been in use for >4 years now, and is well known as being the PostgreSQL
logo ...
On Mon, 12 Jul 2004, Robert Treat wrote:
> On Mon, 2004-07-12 at 15:44, Josh Berkus wrote:
>> Peter,
>>
>>> There is no conflict. If a company calls itself PostgreSQL, Inc., then
>>> it will logically use the PostgreSQL elephant as its logo. If you feel
>>> there is a conflict then the conflict is really a company calling
>>> itself PostgreSQL, Inc. That was not particularly wise, but I don't
>>> really consider it a problem. But the logo is really a much smaller
>>> subset problem.
>>
>> You missed part of Lamar's commentary: apparently the BEH logo belonged to
>> PostgreSQL Inc. and we started using it, not the other way around. So the
>> logo is theirs and we copied it.
>>
>> Which *definitely* wasn't smart.
>>
>
> Maybe I missed this part, but what is the origin of the logo we
> currently use? Ie. who wrote/drew it? where did they first submit it and
> for what purpose? Lamar stated pgsql.inc started using it first, but
> that doesn't mean it was designed for them. I see on the pgsql
> propoganda page a button from Jeff MacDonald with the logo with the note
> that he "Used Daniel's Elephant", which I believe refers to Daniel
> Lundin, though I don't recognize that name. Note also that that page
> indicates that those logo's are for the community, not the corporation,
> which in essence would mean that the company has posted that the logo is
> for the community.
>
>
> Robert Treat
> --
> Build A Brighter Lamp :: Linux Apache {middleware} PostgreSQL
>
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 9: the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your
> joining column's datatypes do not match
>
----
Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org)
Email: scrappy@hub.org Yahoo!: yscrappy ICQ: 7615664
> Per my own email? Huh? I'm against changing something that we've worked > >> 4 years on branding into ppl minds ... Marc said: If you are distributing Slony brochures, use the Slony elephant ... we have an official logo, that is used *everywhere* ... in marketing, I believe its called 'branding a product', and slipping in a different logo, IMHO, only breeds a sense of confusion and incohesiveness as far as the project is concerned ... PostgreSQL Elephant != Slony Elephant != Mammoth Elephant They are all different logos, for different products, and should be used to advertise their respective products, not a different one altogether ... That says to me that you don't want confusion between products, commercial entities etc... with the community. Sincerely, Joshua D. Drake > > > ---- > Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org) > Email: scrappy@hub.org Yahoo!: yscrappy ICQ: 7615664 -- 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
Attachment
On Mon, 12 Jul 2004, Joshua D. Drake wrote: > >> Per my own email? Huh? I'm against changing something that we've worked >> >>> 4 years on branding into ppl minds ... > > Marc said: > > If you are distributing Slony brochures, use the Slony elephant ... we have > an official logo, that is used *everywhere* ... in marketing, I believe its > called 'branding a product', and slipping in a different logo, IMHO, only > breeds a sense of confusion and incohesiveness as far as the project is > concerned ... > > PostgreSQL Elephant != Slony Elephant != Mammoth Elephant > > They are all different logos, for different products, and should be used to > advertise their respective products, not a different one altogether ... > > > That says to me that you don't want confusion between products, commercial > entities etc... with the community. Not sure how you arrived at that from my email ... *puzzled look* ... but I guess that's the fun with email, its easy to interprete things as you want to see them ... that is not what I said, nor what I implied ... ---- Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org) Email: scrappy@hub.org Yahoo!: yscrappy ICQ: 7615664
On Mon, 12 Jul 2004, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> PostgreSQL Elephant != Slony Elephant != Mammoth Elephant
>
> They are all different logos, for different products, and should be used
> to advertise their respective products, not a different one altogether ...
Heck I seem to remember using a Cheeta based logo. How long ago would
that be? Well maybe that was in a different dimension of the multiverse.
Just adding some fuel^h^h^h^h^hthing to the ... ah discussion :-)
Rod
--
"Open Source Software - You usually get more than you pay for..."
"Build A Brighter Lamp :: Linux Apache {middleware} PostgreSQL"
On Mon, 12 Jul 2004, Roderick A. Anderson wrote: > On Mon, 12 Jul 2004, Joshua D. Drake wrote: > >> PostgreSQL Elephant != Slony Elephant != Mammoth Elephant >> >> They are all different logos, for different products, and should be used >> to advertise their respective products, not a different one altogether ... > > Heck I seem to remember using a Cheeta based logo. How long ago would > that be? Well maybe that was in a different dimension of the multiverse. the Cheetah lasted, I think, a month :) False advertising to use a logo that denotes speed when we were the slowest on the block at the time :) ---- Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org) Email: scrappy@hub.org Yahoo!: yscrappy ICQ: 7615664
Marc G. Fournier wrote: > The logo was originally designed to go onto the PostgreSQL > Merchandise, as the Diamond one just didn't print ... OK, so it was the community elephant all along. Thank you. Case closed.
On Mon, 2004-07-12 at 16:35, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> > that he "Used Daniel's Elephant", which I believe refers to Daniel
> > Lundin, though I don't recognize that name. Note also that that page
> > indicates that those logo's are for the community, not the corporation,
> > which in essence would mean that the company has posted that the logo is
> > for the community.
>
> I think the real problem is that while the community elephant and the
> postgresql, inc. elephant is the same, there is a unintended endorsement
> by the community to postgresql, inc.
>
> This is by no means a slam on postgresql, inc but it seems the community
> has always tried to be very business neutral and per Marc's own email
> the elephants should be different.
>
For the record pgsql.inc isnt the only company using the logo, they're
just more prominent about it than others.
Robert Treat
--
Build A Brighter Lamp :: Linux Apache {middleware} PostgreSQL
Robert, > For the record pgsql.inc isnt the only company using the logo, they're > just more prominent about it than others. Really? Who else? -- -Josh Berkus Aglio Database Solutions San Francisco
On Mon, 2004-07-12 at 19:47, Josh Berkus wrote:
> Robert,
>
> > For the record pgsql.inc isnt the only company using the logo, they're
> > just more prominent about it than others.
>
> Really? Who else?
>
Nusphere posts it next to their product, and several hosting sites have
it posted to signify that they support postgresql.
Robert Treat
--
Build A Brighter Lamp :: Linux Apache {middleware} PostgreSQL
[Somewhat regretting this tempest in a teacup] On Monday 12 July 2004 16:51, Marc G. Fournier wrote: > The logo was originally designed to go onto the PostgreSQL Merchandise, as > the Diamond one just didn't print ... to be honest, I have no clue *when* > it was first used for other, either as Inc logo, or Project, but it has > been in use for >4 years now, and is well known as being the PostgreSQL > logo ... Ok. Josh, what would it take to make you comfortable with PostgreSQL Inc and PostgreSQL the project sharing a logo? What if we added an outline diamond? (but allow the BEH both with and without the diamond, so that existing investment is not wasted. Like I said before, whether I like the logo or not is immaterial; I don't like the BEH, but, then again I don't like Tux either, nor do I like the BSD daemon (in fact, I have recommended Linux over BSD a few times to religious organizations that had heard about BSD and wanted to use it, but were very uncomfortable with having a demon in their servers (yes, I know, ridiculous, but The Customer Is Always Right (when they are your customer and you need the cash!))). I've even had people question my having the 'Demon Book' on my shelves (for those who don't get the reference, that is 'The design and implementation of the 4.3BSD operating system' which is one of the Standard Books to read and to have on your shelf....). Neither the Linux kernel nor BSD are changing their logos any time soon, and in fact it would be bad for both to even attempt to do so. To be honest, I was quite disappointed to see slonik leave the website. The twin ideas of 'The Elephant Never Forgets' and 'Diamonds are forever' were just very cool together (and the layers under that, that diamond is the hardest substance known to man, is the most organized substance (a perfect diamond, due to the regular lattice of carbon atoms, would technically be a single molecule, although it's more of a polymer), is the most desireable substance, etc. And the elephant is one of the most sought after big-game anaimals, and is one of the hardest to kill (along with Cape buffalo)). And it _was_ on the Official Website of the project; and the BEH was on the PgSQL, Inc site. But it truly does not print well, particularly on t-shirts, as Marc has already said. Unfortunately, and while IANAL, I think this is true, neither PgSQL Inc nor PostgreSQL the project can now get trademark on the BEH since both have been using it for so long. Of course, PostgreSQL the project isn't a legal entity, and so it really can't have a 'trademark' per se. But, I would not want to cast confusion, and while I do not agree with Peter's statement that the case is closed, I do agree with his basic sentiment, that there is already significant mindshare invested in the BEH. So, for the sake of the project, how can we make this 'OK' for PostgreSQL the project and PostgreSQL, Inc, to be using the same graphic? Does PostgreSQL Inc have a trademark on it? If not, can they get it trademarked and then write specific permission for the project to use it? I understand Josh's point about the potential confusion of the project 'endorsing' PostgreSQL Inc. But does such confusion really exist? (And only someone outside the developer circle can answer that; ask a Doc Searls or Don Marti or anyone outside the PostgreSQL Global Development Group who is knowledgable about PostgreSQL the project). I, Peter, Marc, Jan, and basically everyone else on this list are too close to the project to get an unbiased view. -- Lamar Owen Director of Information Technology Pisgah Astronomical Research Institute 1 PARI Drive Rosman, NC 28772 (828)862-5554 www.pari.edu
Lamar Owen wrote: >Unfortunately, and while IANAL, I think this is true, neither PgSQL Inc nor >PostgreSQL the project can now get trademark on the BEH since both have been >using it for so long. Of course, PostgreSQL the project isn't a legal >entity, and so it really can't have a 'trademark' per se. > > Whomever owns the trademark sets the rules, it's that simple. If you don't think this is a big deal then think about all those entities who do think this a big deal, http://www.google.com/search?q=trademark+disputes+&sourceid=mozilla-search&start=0&start=0&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8 . >Does PostgreSQL Inc have a trademark on it? > Ask Marc, http://strategis.ic.gc.ca/SSG/1017/trdp101713200e.html >I understand Josh's point about the potential confusion of the project >'endorsing' PostgreSQL Inc. > It's about power and control and not about endorsement
Robert Bernier wrote: > > > Lamar Owen wrote: > > >Unfortunately, and while IANAL, I think this is true, neither PgSQL Inc nor > >PostgreSQL the project can now get trademark on the BEH since both have been > >using it for so long. Of course, PostgreSQL the project isn't a legal > >entity, and so it really can't have a 'trademark' per se. > > > > > > Whomever owns the trademark sets the rules, it's that simple. If you > don't think this is a big deal then think about all those entities who > do think this a big deal, > http://www.google.com/search?q=trademark+disputes+&sourceid=mozilla-search&start=0&start=0&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8 So Marc doesn't own it, PostgreSQL Inc does. Marc, if you ever sold the company, what would happen to the PostgreSQL trademark? Marc, you do own the company and not some mixture of people, right? -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 359-1001 + If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073
On Tue, 13 Jul 2004, Bruce Momjian wrote: > Robert Bernier wrote: >> >> >> Lamar Owen wrote: >> >>> Unfortunately, and while IANAL, I think this is true, neither PgSQL Inc nor >>> PostgreSQL the project can now get trademark on the BEH since both have been >>> using it for so long. Of course, PostgreSQL the project isn't a legal >>> entity, and so it really can't have a 'trademark' per se. >>> >>> >> >> Whomever owns the trademark sets the rules, it's that simple. If you >> don't think this is a big deal then think about all those entities who >> do think this a big deal, >> http://www.google.com/search?q=trademark+disputes+&sourceid=mozilla-search&start=0&start=0&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8 > > So Marc doesn't own it, PostgreSQL Inc does. Marc, if you ever sold the > company, what would happen to the PostgreSQL trademark? Marc, you do > own the company and not some mixture of people, right? There are currently 4 primary owners, and about 30 secondary ones, of which you are one, I believe? 3 of the four primary are past/present members of the project, and I believe that 28 of the 30 are same ... I don't know *exact* numbers for the secondary ... Also, if the company was sold, the trademark would be transfer'd over to me, or another suitable entity ... the trademark isn't listed as an 'asset', and that has been made *very* clear several times ... ---- Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org) Email: scrappy@hub.org Yahoo!: yscrappy ICQ: 7615664
Marc G. Fournier wrote: > On Tue, 13 Jul 2004, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > > Robert Bernier wrote: > >> > >> > >> Lamar Owen wrote: > >> > >>> Unfortunately, and while IANAL, I think this is true, neither PgSQL Inc nor > >>> PostgreSQL the project can now get trademark on the BEH since both have been > >>> using it for so long. Of course, PostgreSQL the project isn't a legal > >>> entity, and so it really can't have a 'trademark' per se. > >>> > >>> > >> > >> Whomever owns the trademark sets the rules, it's that simple. If you > >> don't think this is a big deal then think about all those entities who > >> do think this a big deal, > >> http://www.google.com/search?q=trademark+disputes+&sourceid=mozilla-search&start=0&start=0&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8 > > > > So Marc doesn't own it, PostgreSQL Inc does. Marc, if you ever sold the > > company, what would happen to the PostgreSQL trademark? Marc, you do > > own the company and not some mixture of people, right? > > There are currently 4 primary owners, and about 30 secondary ones, of > which you are one, I believe? > > 3 of the four primary are past/present members of the project, and I > believe that 28 of the 30 are same ... I don't know *exact* numbers for > the secondary ... > > Also, if the company was sold, the trademark would be transfer'd over to > me, or another suitable entity ... the trademark isn't listed as an > 'asset', and that has been made *very* clear several times ... So the owner is PostgreSQL Inc, but it isn't an asset? Seems a little strange, but lots of legal issues are strange. Seems you have already considered these issues. -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 359-1001 + If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073
Bruce, > So the owner is PostgreSQL Inc, but it isn't an asset? Seems a little > strange, but lots of legal issues are strange. > > Seems you have already considered these issues. Yes. We discussed this on Core, in fact, about 6-7 months ago. Check your archives. -- Josh Berkus Aglio Database Solutions San Francisco
Robert, Lamar, > >I understand Josh's point about the potential confusion of the project > >'endorsing' PostgreSQL Inc. > > It's about power and control and not about endorsement No, it's not. I could care less about power and control. This is all marketing stuff anyway; it's only important up to the point that it makes people aware of PostgreSQL and what it can do. The reason why this came up -- the *only* reason from my perspective, as I was not even aware of the conflict previously -- was that when I was soliciting donations for expenses for OSCON/LWE, one possible donor expressed concern over spending their money to print the logo of another company. My worry is that this in not the last time we'll hear this question. > Ok. Josh, what would it take to make you comfortable with PostgreSQL Inc > and PostgreSQL the project sharing a logo? What if we added an outline > diamond? (but allow the BEH both with and without the diamond, so that > existing investment is not wasted. Hmmm. I doubt that would make a difference -- a BEH with a diamond would just look like a corporate variation, not worth the bother (unless, of course, someone comes up with a really cool design!). Maybe we're just stuck with it. I can't think of an easy way to change. (FWIW, I actually like the BEH.) -- Josh Berkus Aglio Database Solutions San Francisco
Josh Berkus wrote: >Robert, Lamar, > > > >>>I understand Josh's point about the potential confusion of the project >>>'endorsing' PostgreSQL Inc. >>> >>> >>It's about power and control and not about endorsement >> >> > >The reason why this came up -- the *only* reason from my perspective, as I was >not even aware of the conflict previously -- was that when I was soliciting >donations for expenses for OSCON/LWE, one possible donor expressed concern >over spending their money to print the logo of another company. > > > sounds like you've made my argument ;-)
On Tue, 13 Jul 2004, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > So the owner is PostgreSQL Inc, but it isn't an asset? Seems a little > strange, but lots of legal issues are strange. > > Seems you have already considered these issues. Very much so ... ---- Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org) Email: scrappy@hub.org Yahoo!: yscrappy ICQ: 7615664
On 7/13/2004 12:15 PM, Marc G. Fournier wrote: > Also, if the company was sold, the trademark would be transfer'd over to > me, or another suitable entity ... the trademark isn't listed as an > 'asset', and that has been made *very* clear several times ... Which assumes that you have control over this. But this is only true for a voluntary sale. IANAL but in the event of filing for bankruptcy (as a hypothetical case) you might not have that option. Jan -- #======================================================================# # It's easier to get forgiveness for being wrong than for being right. # # Let's break this rule - forgive me. # #================================================== JanWieck@Yahoo.com #
Josh Berkus wrote: > The reason why this came up -- the *only* reason from my perspective, > as I was not even aware of the conflict previously -- was that when I > was soliciting donations for expenses for OSCON/LWE, one possible > donor expressed concern over spending their money to print the logo > of another company. OK, here's another "donor" who expresses his concern about having to reprint hundreds, possibly thousands, of euros worth of things that already exist just because someone else has a problem because some company no one except a few insiders have ever heard of uses the logo for the very logical reason that it belongs to the product they are promoting. -- Peter Eisentraut http://developer.postgresql.org/~petere/
Peter, > OK, here's another "donor" who expresses his concern about having to > reprint hundreds, possibly thousands, of euros worth of things that > already exist just because someone else has a problem because some > company no one except a few insiders have ever heard of uses the logo > for the very logical reason that it belongs to the product they are > promoting. <grin> Point taken. -- -Josh Berkus Aglio Database Solutions San Francisco
On Tue, 2004-07-13 at 12:49, Josh Berkus wrote:
> Robert, Lamar,
>
> > >I understand Josh's point about the potential confusion of the project
> > >'endorsing' PostgreSQL Inc.
> >
> > It's about power and control and not about endorsement
>
> No, it's not. I could care less about power and control. This is all
> marketing stuff anyway; it's only important up to the point that it makes
> people aware of PostgreSQL and what it can do.
>
> The reason why this came up -- the *only* reason from my perspective, as I was
> not even aware of the conflict previously -- was that when I was soliciting
> donations for expenses for OSCON/LWE, one possible donor expressed concern
> over spending their money to print the logo of another company. My worry is
> that this in not the last time we'll hear this question.
>
> > Ok. Josh, what would it take to make you comfortable with PostgreSQL Inc
> > and PostgreSQL the project sharing a logo? What if we added an outline
> > diamond? (but allow the BEH both with and without the diamond, so that
> > existing investment is not wasted.
>
> Hmmm. I doubt that would make a difference -- a BEH with a diamond would just
> look like a corporate variation, not worth the bother (unless, of course,
> someone comes up with a really cool design!).
>
> Maybe we're just stuck with it. I can't think of an easy way to change.
>
Maybe you can convince pgsql.inc to make their own variation of the logo
and go forth with that?
Robert Treat
--
Build A Brighter Lamp :: Linux Apache {middleware} PostgreSQL
Robert Treat wrote: > Maybe you can convince pgsql.inc to make their own variation of the > logo and go forth with that? They are using it because it's the community elephant. They put it on merchandise because it's the community elephant. Why would they change it? -- Peter Eisentraut http://developer.postgresql.org/~petere/
On Tue, 2004-07-13 at 14:17, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Robert Treat wrote:
> > Maybe you can convince pgsql.inc to make their own variation of the
> > logo and go forth with that?
>
> 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...
> Why would they change
> it?
>
so josh would feel better :-)
Robert Treat
--
Build A Brighter Lamp :: Linux Apache {middleware} PostgreSQL
Peter Eisentraut wrote: > Robert Treat wrote: > >>Maybe you can convince pgsql.inc to make their own variation of the >>logo and go forth with that? > > > They are using it because it's the community elephant. They put it on > merchandise because it's the community elephant. Why would they change > it? > As long as pgsql.inc is committed to PostgreSQL as open source database, and makes clear they're not the project itself but a commercial supporter, I don't see a problem. Currently, the trademark PostgreSQL is held by pgsql.inc, used there since 1999. In case pgsql.inc goes down, a follow-up owner would have continue in the same fashion, because strictly speaking the trademark is only tolerated because the name is in use by the project since 1996. pgsql.inc shows the elephant tightly coupled to the PostgreSQL name, just as we do, so while the origination still seems unclear at first sight the same rules should apply. By promoting name and elephant in their publications, pgsql.inc and others make the PostgreSQL community more visible. This is fine, and as long as those companies don't advertise stuff which could compromise PostgreSQL (such as recommending MummySQL), it's ok if they make profit from that (we're not GPL at last). Conclusion: the elephant is publicly known as the community's logo, just as the mark PostgreSQL. Everything fine. Just another aspect: The current logo can be represented in very low resolutions too, e.g. as desktop or menu icon. Any different proposal should take this usage into consideration. Regards, Andreas
>>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
Attachment
On Tuesday 13 July 2004 11:24, Robert Bernier wrote: > >Does PostgreSQL Inc have a trademark on it? > Ask Marc, http://strategis.ic.gc.ca/SSG/1017/trdp101713200e.html Incidentally, the trademark is for the TEXT, not the graphic. And I find it interesting that the Official Trademark has no space, but the Trademark office's webpage list Postgre SQL Inc with a space, and the index headings have spaces (Postgre SQL). And we wonder why people call us 'Postgre?' But the BEH graphic is not listed there. And the BEH is the antecedent of the 'it' in the sentence I wrote: "Does PostgreSQL Inc have a trademark on _it_?" I'll admit to not being 100% comfortable with this scenario at this time, when just three years ago it wouldn't have (and indeed didn't) bother me. -- Lamar Owen Director of Information Technology Pisgah Astronomical Research Institute 1 PARI Drive Rosman, NC 28772 (828)862-5554 www.pari.edu
Joshua D. Drake wrote: > > 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... I understand the concern and I share it. I do think that there are a number of ways around this problem, and that some of these are preemptive and others are reactive. See below for my suggestions. Understand, however, that IANAL. > 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. I think it should be possible to demonstrate that the postgreSQL development is done through a cooperative methodology involving individuals from PostgreSQL, Inc, SRA, and others. In essence, the project, whose name and existance predates PostgreSQL Inc, might not be in so much trouble after all. But, that doesn't prevent anyone from trying, and that could be a serious problem. > 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. I think the who question is bigger than the how question, personally, given the fact that the project predates the company significantly. If someone sues PostgreSQL, Inc, for these things, or there is a bankrupsy proceeding, I don't want PostgreSQL, Inc. to be in the position of having to distance themselves from the project. I think that we need to give serious thought to how we can stand for ourselves, and also take some proactive steps. > 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 may be some ways around this. > There has to be a clear distinction somehow that PostgreSQL, Inc. is > not PostgreSQL.Org. That distinction does not currently exist. You are right to the extent that the distinction is not visible enough. > 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. > Here are my suggestions for steps which could be done now. PostgreSQL, Inc. could provide a blanket and irrevocable public license for the use of the logo and relavent trademark for promoting PostgreSQL software. That way if someone comes after us, we claim that we have license. Arrangements should be made for the logo and relavent trademarks to be passed to the PostgreSQL Advocacy group once non-profit status is achieved. License can then be granted back to them (irrevocably, etc.) to use the registered trademarks. This would go a long way to show that the company sprang from the community rather than the other way around. This way, also, nobody loses out on investment in branding. Merely the legal status of the trademark and logo are different. Aside from that, we could look at transitioning to a new logo. But that may not be easier for anyone in the long run. Best Wishes, Chris Travers Metatron Technology Consulting