[Objectbridge-developers] [Fwd: RE: Use of term "Objectbridge"]]

[Thomas M. <tho...@ho...>]

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: RE: Use of term "Objectbridge"]
Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2001 10:59:44 -0700
From: "Linda" <li...@ac...>
Reply-To: <li...@ac...>
To: "Thomas Mahler" <tho...@ho...>

Thomas,

Thanks for your response and your attention to this.  It is acceptable
to
Actional that you keep the URL using the Objectbridge term as it would
be
difficult to change.

Many thanks for your cooperation in this and good luck on your project!

Regards,

Linda

-----Original Message-----
From: to...@ma... [mailto:to...@ma...]On Behalf Of
Thomas Mahler
Sent: Sunday, August 12, 2001 10:21 PM
To: li...@ac...
Subject: Re: Use of term "Objectbridge"]


Hi Linda,

I was on vacation, thus there was some delay in the process of renaming
our project. But since Saturday its officially named
ObJectRelationalBridge. We also changed all Logos accordingly and all
references in documentation and sourcecode.

One thing we could not change is the URL of the project at sourceforge
(objectbridge.sourceforge.net). For some reason this name is fixed. To
get this URL changed would require to launch a totally new project which
would bring a lot more work with it.

I hope this is OK for you.

Regards,

Thomas Mahler



Linda wrote:
>
> Hi Thomas,
>
> Thank you for the email.  I did receive it but was out of the office some
of
> yesterday and unable to respond right away.
>
> We would agree that your new name is different enough from our
ObjectBridge
> name to avoid confusion.  It seems like a good name to me.  I understand
it
> will take some time for you to change from the use of ObjectBridge to your
> new name, which is fine.
>
> Thank you for your kindness and cooperation in working this out.  I wish
you
> and the people in your group success in your programming.  Good luck!
>
> Regards,
>
> Linda
>
> *******************************
> Linda Whillock
> Contracts Manager
> Actional Corporation
> 701 N. Shoreline Blvd.
> Mountain View, CA 94043
> 650.254.4117 (Phone)
> 650.254.4101 (Fax)
> li...@ac... <mailto:li...@ac...>
>
> Actional delivers a high-performance integration architecture
> that works with your existing systems and applications,
> without adding new middleware. Actional's Control Broker
> platform allows you to utilize enterprise services across
> hundreds of applications with broad support for industry
> standards like XML, Java, EJB, COM, and CORBA.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: to...@ma... [mailto:to...@ma...]On Behalf Of
> Thomas Mahler
> Sent: Tuesday, July 10, 2001 3:12 PM
> To: li...@ac...
> Subject: Re: Use of term "Objectbridge"]
>
> Dear Linda,
>
> I send an email to you yesterday, but due to a battery problem with my
> PC it was dated 01 Jan 1997. So may be you did not see it in your inbox?
>
> Here it is again:
>
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: Re: Use of term "Objectbridge"
> Date: Wed, 01 Jan 1997 00:24:38 +0100
> From: Thomas Mahler <tho...@ho...>
> Organization: NOORG
> To: li...@ac...
> References: <NEB...@ac...>
>
> Dear Linda,
>
> After some internal discussions we now found a name for our project that
> will hopefully be acceptable for all of us.
>
> Our favourite name is "ObJectRelationalBridge". We hope that you have no
> objections against this name? !
> We think it's quite different from your trademarked term and does reveal
> even more about the purpose of our project than the old one.
> I already prepared our documentation for this new name. If you consent
> to this name I will have a new release and a WebSite update within this
> week.
>
> I hope you can accept our suggestion,
>
> best regards,
>
> Thomas Mahler
>
> Linda wrote:
> >
> > Dear Thomas,
> >
> > Thank you for the response.  I understand that this is a volunteer
project
> > and wish you well in the development of your software.  Unfortunately,
we
> do
> > consider that use of the name "ObJectBridge" would be considered a
> trademark
> > infringement under the Lanham Act, Section 1114.  Even though you will
not
> > be charging money for your software, it still would (and will) be
> considered
> > a product that is distributed to the public.  Also, we believe since the
> > name is nearly identical (the capitalization change does not make it
truly
> > different), our products are similar, and some of our users may be in
> > similar fields, the use of the ObjectBridge name for your software would
> > likely cause confusion or possible mistake. Since the point of
> trademarking
> > is to avoid confusion in the marketplace, we believe there is possible
> > confusion in your use of the name ObJectBridge.
> >
> > Because of this, we would like to ask you to please find another name to
> use
> > other than ObJectBridge.  Unfortunately, we must insist on this.  I
> > understand this may take some time per your email.
> >
> > Please email or call if you have any questions.  Good luck with your
work.
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Linda
> >
> > ******************************
> > Linda Whillock
> > Contracts Manager
> > Actional Corporation
> > 701 N. Shoreline Blvd.
> > Mountain View, CA 94043
> > 650.254.4117 (Phone)
> > 650.254.4101 (Fax)
> > li...@ac... <mailto:li...@ac...>
> >
> > Actional delivers a high-performance integration architecture
> > that works with your existing systems and applications,
> > without adding new middleware. Actional's Control Broker
> > platform allows you to utilize enterprise services across
> > hundreds of applications with broad support for industry
> > standards like XML, Java, EJB, COM, and CORBA.
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: to...@ma... [mailto:to...@ma...]On Behalf Of
> > Thomas Mahler
> > Sent: Tuesday, December 31, 1996 4:02 PM
> > To: Linda
> > Cc: objectbridge
> > Subject: Re: Use of term "Objectbridge"
> >
> > Dear Linda,
> >
> > We did not intent to conflict with your trademark. "ObJectBridge" (note:
> > it is not spelled "Objectbridge", "ObjectBridge" or "Object Bridge") is
> > a non-commercial OpenSource project driven by an international developer
> > community, mediated by SourceForge.net.
> > It is not a "Product" according to the conventional notion:
> > There is no Vendor, there is no Product that is sold to customers, etc.
> > Can there be a trademark conflict without two Vendors trading two
> > Products under the same name?
> > I'm not a lawyer but I don't see a conflict here?!
> >
> > We will of course change the Name of our Project if you insist.
> >
> > We had some internal discussion's on alternative names but did not come
> > to a final conclusion.
> >
> > It will take us a while to change all Documents, sources and graphics as
> > we all are only vonlunteering on this project.
> >
> > best regards,
> >
> > Thomas Mahler
> >
> > And we will of course change ou
> >
> > Linda wrote:
> > >
> > > Dear Mr. Mahler,
> > >
> > > I noticed that you have used the name Objectbridge for your
> > > software.  Unfortunately the name Object bridge was
> > > trademarked on 6/23/96 by Visual Edge Software and has been
> > > in use regularly as our product name.  You can confirm this
> > > through the patent and trademark office's website.  I
> > > noticed that your product is in beta version still and hope
> > > you might be able to please chose another name for your
> > > product which would not conflict with ours.
> > >
> > > Many thanks for your cooperation in this.  You can reach me
> > > at li...@ac... (or visit our website at
> > > actional.com).  Actional Corporation was formerly Visual
> > > Edge Software.
> > >
> > > -- Linda
> > >
> > >