Well, judging from the samples I have seen on renamed packages and the like, you cannot start your package name with umbraco.

Samples of no go:
Umbraco Something
Umb Something
umbSomething (umbImport was changed to CMS Import for example, because too many thought it was an HQ project)

Borderline is uSomething.

Recommended is to just steer clear: "Skiltz Something"

Or if you really want to mention umbraco, then "Something 4 Umbraco" or even "Skiltz Something for Umbraco".

The main thing is that the name should not make the user think that HQ made it, thus making a confusion on the market about who made what.

I ahve started using the following format:

Scandia.umb.[type].[name]

Where 'type' would be something like Events, Utilities, TinyMce, etc. (basically denoting the regios or area of focus) and 'name' would refer to the function itself. 

I hope this helps.

-- Nik

Here's the summary and exerpts from a thread on this subject a couple years ago.

Niels has summarized the issue as follows... Our guidelines are ultra simple; we don't allow any usage of "umbraco" in product names commercial or non-commercial, with the only exception that open source projects may append "for umbraco". There's nothing special about this, just like you're not allowed to do a "Microsoft Office Backup" or "Photoshop Search".

Here's my take on this with some real-world examples...

The goal is to protect the trademark that is "umbraco" from being diluted and meaningless and no longer a trademark. It is not to stop people from using umbraco, building sites, making changes/additions/packages, etc.

Suppose a brilliant new package were created that did something everyone wanted. This package had everything a package should have and worked flawlessly. What should this package be called?

TRADEMARK EXAMPLES

UmbracoWidget      <-- trademark violation
Umbraco Widget      <-- trademark violation
umbWidget      <-- you're really trying to get around this, aren't you?
Widget for Umbraco     <-- Not a violation if an open source project
Widget     <-- Best choice!

This has nothing to do with the actual content of the package, simply its name. That is where the trademark comes in.

You see, a trademark is a proper noun, not an adjective. It should not be combined with other terms into a compound word or a phrase in which umbraco is not used as a proper noun.

When you have a name like "Widget for Umbraco", Umbraco is being used as a proper noun, which is trademarked in-and-of-iteslf. Similarly, "Widget" is also being used as a noun and can be trademarked. But the entire phrase is NOT trademarked, nor is it trademark-able.

Think about where you'd put the little "TM" symbol in the name. Including trademark symbols with the examples above yields:

UmbracoWidget(TM)     <-- can't combine one trademark inside another
Umbraco(TM) Widget(TM)     <-- can't use a trademark as an adjective
umbWidget(TM)     <-- umb is an abbreviation for umbraco; don't go there
Widget(TM) for Umbraco(TM)     <-- widget is trademarked, and references a trademarked product
Widget(TM)     <-- perfect!


LOGO
The orange circle with the ~U~ in it is also a trademark and you can't go putting it all over the place either. But if you are a certified developer or solution provider or you get approval in other cases, you can use it.


FAIR USE
Obviously, you can refer to umbraco in your writing. You can use the trademarked logo and name, screenshots, etc. in a review, article, etc. You are not claiming any of the trademarked items as your own.

Or, to put it another way, you're giving credit where the credit is due. (yes, that is a very crude rule of thumb).


HOWEVER...
If you get written approval from umbraco I/S (that is, the company), you can use any name you like. But you need the approval first.

I think Niels has been very lenient in the past with folks using the umbraco name and/or logo. That wasn't a great idea. Not only is it confusing to know if something is an "official" umbraco widget, but to continue allowing it would eventually nullify his trademarks.

I see three reasons to respect the umbraco trademarks that are to OUR advantage:

1. I can trademark my own names, which isn't possible if I'm infringing on another's trademark.
2. I make clear what is MY work by not confusing people with the umbraco name.
3. I support the umbraco community and the umbraco product that I love by not using the umbraco trademarks as my own, which would eventually destroy the product and the community if the trademarks were no longer legally valid.

I hope this discussion is helpful. I'm certainly not speaking for Niels, but I believe this is accurate (at least according to US trademark law).

Corrections, additions, and clarifications warmly encouraged!

cheers,
doug.

Maybe add a little note to this. Nowadays a lot of packages just start with a "u". For example uWebshop and uComponents.

Jeroen

is working on a reply...