Re: Pervasive PostgreSQL Announcement

From: "Lance Obermeyer" <LObermey(at)pervasive(dot)com>
To: "Robert Bernier" <robert(dot)bernier5(at)sympatico(dot)ca>
Cc: <pgsql-advocacy(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Pervasive PostgreSQL Announcement
Date: 2005-01-11 17:39:49
Message-ID: 072BDB2B234F3840B0AC03411084C9AF46B3F8@ausmail2k2.aus.pervasive.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-advocacy

Since this seems to have stuck a nerve, let me try and explain a bit more behind the naming decision.

Many posters seem to prefer if I would have named my product "Pervasive PostgreSQL." To be honest, I agree. That was preferable. However, the inescapable fact is that "PostgreSQL" is a registered trademark owned by somebody else. Unless I hold a signed license from the trademark holder, I would be knowingly infringing upon somebody else's property right. That opens me to legal liability of unknowable scale. There are public posts in the advocacy group essentially pledging to not try and enforce the trademark against groups like Pervasive. Those posts are legally unpersuasive. There are others using the trademark presumably without license. That does not preclude the trademark holder sending me (or them) a cease and desist letter, it only makes it easier for me to defend myself.

The bottom line is that there is a risk, albeit small, that my company, as well as other companies using the word, could get dragged into court to explain why it knowingly infringed on a registered trademark. That risk is significantly less with the word "Postgres" since it is not a registered trademark. Contrary to popular opinion, companies desperately want to avoid going to court, and we always take the less risky path. So, had there been a mechanism in place to solve this above similar to what Linus has done with the Linux Mark Institute, we wouldn't be here.

While I sense there is a desire to paint my intentions as "evil", I can only ask you to believe that it isn't the case. My decisions have been an honest response to navigating waters where opinion (the name "PostgreSQL" is community property) is distinctly different from fact (the word "PostgreSQL" is a registered trademark). My suggestion, whether you accept it or not, is to formally resolve this before the next guy that is trying to be on the right side of the community and the law shows up.

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster

Responses

Browse pgsql-advocacy by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Richard Ibbotson 2005-01-11 17:58:23 Re: Linux Seminar Sheffield UK - 2nd March 2005
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2005-01-11 17:26:03 Re: Linux Seminar Sheffield UK - 2nd March 2005