Open ortolot opened 10 years ago
ortolot
commented
10 years ago Decsriptive words would include: photo, picture, album, gallery, show, publish, share, web or host. The problem is that most simple combinations of such words are already used, so a specific part would have to be added (like the j in jGallery for instance).
First suggestion that comes to my mind: psAlbum (ps for PhotoShow).
ortolot
commented
10 years ago Or PhotoShow-Gallery, like the domain name currently used for this project (of course, photoshow.com was already taken, which is not a good sign…). But that sounds a bit long.
ortolot
commented
9 years ago Actually naming it PhotoShow-Gallery would not be a solution, as it still contains the name PhotoShow, which would be enough to cause trouble.
Since I have to package PhotoShow very soon if I want it to be in the next Debian release, I will wait for a week or two to have your opinion on this issue, after which I will just package it under the changed name psAlbum.
LudovicRousseau
commented
9 years ago I don't understand why you want to rename the project if no other project or company has ever complained.
I don't think it is in the Debian habit (and I am a Debian Developer) to proactively deal with possible copyright issues. It will always to possible to rename the Debian package if a problem ever occurs.
ortolot
commented
9 years ago Ludovic Rousseau, 2014-09-05 07:58-0700:
I don't understand why you want to rename the project if no other project or company has ever complained.
Well, at least, it would be less painful to do it now. Given the context (existing trademarks for the exact domain that PhotoShow covers), it is very likely that, if this project becomes widely known, it will face requests to change its name under threat of lawsuits.
I don't think it is in the Debian habit (and I am a Debian Developer) to proactively deal with possible copyright issues. It will always to possible to rename the Debian package if a problem ever occurs.
That is right, good point, although I wonder how that would be done for existing stable (and oldstable, lts…) releases of Debian. But I may not have to proactively change its name to package it indeed.
thibaud-rohmer
commented
9 years ago Hi guys !
ortolot, I understand your concern, and yes, that is a valid point. I did my research too when I created the project, and I found Roxio's software, as well as the other projects. However, I still haven't gotten any complaint from any of those projects, and I'm quite happy with the name as it is. Sure, if I am asked to change it later on, I will, but I do not intend to change it right now.
Still, I do have one question : is there a package named "photoshow" in the Debian distribution as of now ? If so, you can name your package "photoshow-gallery", but if there isn't, I think it's safe to keep it simple, and stay with "photoshow".
On 5 September 2014 17:10, ortolot notifications@github.com wrote:
Ludovic Rousseau, 2014-09-05 07:58-0700:
I don't understand why you want to rename the project if no other project or company has ever complained.
Well, at least, it would be less painful to do it now. Given the context (existing trademarks for the exact domain that PhotoShow covers), it is very likely that, if this project becomes widely known, it will face requests to change its name under threat of lawsuits.
I don't think it is in the Debian habit (and I am a Debian Developer) to proactively deal with possible copyright issues. It will always to possible to rename the Debian package if a problem ever occurs.
That is right, good point, although I wonder how that would be done for existing stable (and oldstable, lts...) releases of Debian. But I may not have to proactively change its name to package it indeed.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub https://github.com/thibaud-rohmer/PhotoShow/issues/247#issuecomment-54637602 .
ortolot
commented
9 years ago Hello Thibaud.
Thibaud Rohmer, 2014-09-05 08:20-0700:
ortolot, I understand your concern, and yes, that is a valid point. I did my research too when I created the project, and I found Roxio's software, as well as the other projects. However, I still haven't gotten any complaint from any of those projects, and I'm quite happy with the name as it is. Sure, if I am asked to change it later on, I will, but I do not intend to change it right now.
Still, I do have one question : is there a package named "photoshow" in the Debian distribution as of now ? If so, you can name your package "photoshow-gallery", but if there isn't, I think it's safe to keep it simple, and stay with "photoshow".
No, fortunately there is no package named this way in Debian, which was predictible since there is no other free software named the same.
I will thus keep the name PhotoShow for now, and change it later if this is needed at some point.
Thank you for your answer.
(By the way, while speaking about Debian packaging, did you get my question about PhotoShow release policy, or should I resend it to you?)
thibaud-rohmer
commented
9 years ago I'm currently in Oslo, in a hotel with a very bad wifi, so... could you send it again please ? it'll be easier for me =)
BTW, if anyone reading this is in Oslo tonight, I'm going out in the "Grunerlokka" area. Just saying.
On 5 September 2014 17:46, ortolot notifications@github.com wrote:
Hello Thibaud.
Thibaud Rohmer, 2014-09-05 08:20-0700:
ortolot, I understand your concern, and yes, that is a valid point. I did my research too when I created the project, and I found Roxio's software, as well as the other projects. However, I still haven't gotten any complaint from any of those projects, and I'm quite happy with the name as it is. Sure, if I am asked to change it later on, I will, but I do not intend to change it right now.
Still, I do have one question : is there a package named "photoshow" in the Debian distribution as of now ? If so, you can name your package "photoshow-gallery", but if there isn't, I think it's safe to keep it simple, and stay with "photoshow".
No, fortunately there is no package named this way in Debian, which was predictible since there is no other free software named the same.
I will thus keep the name PhotoShow for now, and change it later if this is needed at some point.
Thank you for your answer.
(By the way, while speaking about Debian packaging, did you get my question about PhotoShow release policy, or should I resend it to you?)
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub https://github.com/thibaud-rohmer/PhotoShow/issues/247#issuecomment-54642672 .
Hello,
I have been pointed out that the name “PhotoShow” sounds like the Adobe software “Photoshop”, so I checked whether or not there were other software named in a similar way, and I discovered worse: there are several pieces of software that are named “PhotoShow” or “Photo Show”. For instance: Roxio PhotoShow http://www.photoshow.com/ Perfect Photo Show http://www.perfectphotoshow.com/ (and several others)
Then, I had a look to the INPI trade mark database to see whether or not there were trade marks for that name in France. Turns out there is, one of them covering domains such as websites and photo management software. I also checked in the US Patents and Trade Marks office database: same think, this name is already a registered trade mark covering software for publishing pictures.
So, I would advise that you change the name of this piece of software so it can be distributed and used without risking a name clash on the user's computer or a lawsuit with a company owning a trade mark on that name. Just to make it clear, I am not an owner of such a trade mark and I will cause no trouble on that matter, but I am considering packaging this software in Debian, and that issue may be a blocking one for that purpose: anyway, if you choose to keep the name “PhotoShow”, I will probably have to find a suitable alternative name for that software in Debian (and tell you, so you can explain on your website that this software has a distinct name in Debian, if you want).
I will add comments on this issue if I find proper alternative names.
Regards,
Tanguy Ortolo