Re: Petition about the Firefox trademark problem
Paul E Condon wrote:
>On Tue, Oct 24, 2006 at 08:57:18AM -0500, Mike McCarty wrote:
>
>
>>Steve Lamb wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Hans du Plooy wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>Calling someone a weasel has never been a compliment
>>>>
>>>>
>>> *covers his ferrets eyes* Hey, there's children present! Sheesh, some
>>>people.
>>>
>>>
>>I enjoyed that post.
>>
>>Well, how about "Web Ferret"? "Ferret", AFAIK, only has neutral
>>connotations, and in this context, perhaps good ones (nosing around
>>for information).
>>
>>OTOH, why use a fancy name at all? How about "Debian Web Browser"?
>>
>>ISTM that the purpose of such fancy names has always been to
>>build brand recognition and brand loyalty. Why do you feel the
>>need to have such in a non-commercial product?
>>
>>
>
>The purpose of a name is to be a unique identifier. In computing, it
>is very convenient to have unique identifiers that have no embedded
>space characters. The need for unique identifiers in commerce is the
>reason trade marks exist. "Debfox" would probably not have trade mark
>problems, has no embedded spaces, signals the origin of thing and who
>has named it, and is terse. "Dbfx" is more cryptic possible name, and
>is very terse.
>
>
>
So how about 'firetux'? A penguin of fire is as unlikely as a fox of fire.
sorry everybody, couldn't resist...
Reply to: