I have a hobby opne source Java project hosted at google code (linkset).
May I use a prefix "com.google.code.linkset" as a package name for this project?
P.S. I dont own "org.linkset" domain :( but i like the name :)
+3
A:
the name of your packages does not have to reflect the domain it's hosted at.
I think using com.google prefix will mislead your users into thinking the code was developed at google. don't do it unless you want to handle the backfire from your users when they realize it's not.
Omry
2010-04-14 09:03:57
so perhaps something neutral like "org.opensource" ?
lbownik
2010-04-14 09:08:06
@lbownik: that's not neutral either. "opensource.org" is owned by the OSI.
Joachim Sauer
2010-04-14 09:12:02
+1
A:
You can use pretty much anything as a package name, provided that it respects the java spec (no keywords, not starting with a number ...) But really you shouldn't unless you work at Google!
Guillaume
2010-04-14 09:05:09
+3
A:
Since it would be misleading as Omry already mentioned, why not use org.lbownik.util.linkset?
stacker
2010-04-14 09:19:55
This sounds reasonable since the possibility of someone registering such domain (lbownik - Lukas Bownik) is low. :)
lbownik
2010-04-15 06:51:14
By the way. Is there a possibility to register a domain like "lbownik.org" ane redirect it to "code.google.com/p/linkset" for free?
lbownik
2010-04-15 06:54:51
@lbownik: registering the domain almost always costs some money, but not a lot (I would be very wary of free offers). Redirecting is often free with the registration.
Joachim Sauer
2010-04-15 08:35:19
+1
A:
If you name your package com.google.code.linkset it is possible that sometime in the future you will receive a "cease and desist" letter from Google's lawyers, citing your package name as infringing Google's registered trademarks.
EDIT
If you ever do receive such a letter, do not ignore it based on some amateur legal theorizing you read on some website. If you want to resist the demand, you should first talk to a professional lawyer.
Stephen C
2010-04-14 12:19:29
Which you can ignore, since trademark law protects trade names, and thus requires trade.
MSalters
2010-04-14 12:36:35
@MSalters you should know better than to offer unsound advice like that!!
Stephen C
2010-04-15 07:23:08
Feel free to fleece your local lawyer. But it doesn't really take a professional to figure out that _trade_marks are related to _trade_. In particular, it relates to the exchange of _products and services_ in exchange for compensation.
MSalters
2010-04-15 09:55:31
@MSlater - actually, that is not the criteria. The criteria is that you are using the mark for a commercial purpose. And just hosting Google ads on your project page would be sufficient. (I recall a recent case involving some XYZsucks.com site where this was an issue.)
Stephen C
2010-04-15 10:45:18
A:
I think using com.google in your domain is a mistake, since it will imply that your project is owned/endorsed by Google. However, people have been using net.sourceforge in their Sourceforge-based projects for years, and this is really the same thing. I didn't think that was a good idea, either. So while you can use com.google in your domain, I think it's a bad idea and you should use something else.
Joey Gibson
2010-04-14 13:50:18
net.sourceforge seems more reasonable to me than com.google, since sourceforge is a place to host code projects, while google is many other things besides.
David Thornley
2010-04-14 14:39:22