[OTR-dev] What about an OTR org.?

[Paul Wouters]

On Sat, 12 Jan 2013, Peter Lawler wrote:

> IIRC, pidgin(1) [formerly gaim(1)] similarly "didn't need" a foundation etc 
> until AOL tried suing the pants off them 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pidgin_(software)#Naming_dispute 
> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pidgin_%28software%29#Naming_dispute> Whilst I 
> can't speak for those involved, I deeply suspect having a foundation before 
> the suit turned up would've saved a number of contributors a lot of pain, 
> heartache and stress (and subsequently may not have delayed releases/patches 
> as much as it may have done).
>
> Pete.
>
> P.S. AFAIK I can chat about the AOL thing, however I believe that others 
> involved may have been required to sign agreements banning them from 
> discussing it ever again...
>
> P.P.S. Given the previous PS, this email will self destruct in 3... 2... 1...

You are right that ensuring the name/trademark using a formal non-profit
is useful, although being right and surviving a lawsuit with the name
intact are two different things, and forming a non-profit does paint a
target on your back as well. In most cases, a rename of the software is
much much cheaper, and the energy is better spent on the software, than on
the battle for the name, especially if that battle means you can't
really release new versions.

I still don't think OTR requires an organisation at this moment, and one
way of securing the naming rights would be to write up the spec as RFC,
something Peter and I keep reminding each other of, but we never manage
to do before the next IETF.

Paul
ps. See https://nohats.ca/wordpress/openswan/