Peter, Robert, Simon, etc:
> > >The point is, they are claiming trademark on a name that was hitherto
> > > free for everyone to use.
> >
> > Oh good point. Maybe a simple note from Josh Berkus letting them
> > know about that would be a good idea.
>
> This kind of thing is going to bite us someday. All it takes is one
> bastard.
Lance (of Pervasive) actually has been replying to this thread, but there's
something wrong with his subscribtion and the stuff is held up for
moderation. You'll see it soon. To sum up:
Their trademark is "Pervasive Postgres", not "Postgres" and not "PostgreSQL".
This makes sense, and I'd trust their lawyers investigated its
enforcability/legality. None of us, last I checked, are attorneys.
For that matter, Josh Drake has a trademark on "Mammoth" in the context of
"PostgreSQL", and has had for a year. SRA has a trademark on "PowerGres".
Last year, the ill-fated Lon James briefly incorporated as "Postgres Inc."
None of this has interfered in any way with the community's ability to
distribute stuff and use the words we want to.
FWIW, the various companies using the name "PostgreSQL" for products have,as a
rule, contacted the Core Team to discuss it first, and received "permission"
from at least one Core member. While this is hardly legally formal, we do
have some kind of process for the trademark.
--
Josh Berkus
Aglio Database Solutions
San Francisco
