Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Promoting PostgreSQL to the world.

From: Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>
To: Rod Taylor <pg(at)rbt(dot)ca>, Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: "pgsql-www(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-www(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Promoting PostgreSQL to the world.
Date: 2004-04-29 19:51:15
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-www

> So yes, I would argue that Command Prompt should not be distributing a
> modified PostgreSQL under the PostgreSQL brand name. Calling it Mammoth
> Database and mentioning that it is based, in part, on PostgreSQL would
> be more appropriate.

What if, on the other hand, they invite us to inspect it?

And it's not like CMD is a total non-contributor in the way dbExperts is.   
While they're not patching modules to the main source, they've released 
several add-ons as OSS.   If I was going to yank the trademark chain on 
anyone, it would be dbexperts.

However, Linux did *not* get where it is today by Linus prohibiting  the use 
of the name.   We *should* send out letters to companies making sure that 
they have a trademark notice for us ("PostgreSQL is a Registered 
Trademark") ... but that opens up another sticky can o'worms, namely that the 
trademark is filed for PostgreSQL Inc, not for the PGDG, which legally 
doesn't exist.

-Josh Berkus
 Aglio Database Solutions
 San Francisco

In response to


pgsql-www by date

Next:From: Peter EisentrautDate: 2004-04-29 19:56:22
Subject: Re: Promoting PostgreSQL to the world.
Previous:From: Josh BerkusDate: 2004-04-29 19:45:03
Subject: Re: First two requests for PUGs

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group