Andrew Jaquith is concerned that ERM (Enterprise Rights Management), an area he covers for Forrester, is being confused with ERM (Enterprise Risk Management), a different area covered by his colleague Chris McClean. He asserts that Forrester will now use the term "data labeling" to address this category in the future.

Rich Mogull objects strenuously, saying that Andrew's term is factually incorrect.

while I disagree with Rich's reasoning – I don't believe made-up terms…or labels   can ever be "facts" – I do agree that Andrew's choice is an awkward one.

The problem with the word "labeling" is that it is too passive. Even the verb label reminds me of a jar of jam, not some gee-whiz technology that someone wants to buy (which, in the end, is the reason for product categories to begin with).

Of course, I also empathize with Andrew and his campaign against rights (not very politically, correct, that ). However, I think his ERM has more traction than McClean's ERM, as evidenced by his own admission that he expected the post to be about rights and not risk. So, I don't think it is the end of the world to continue with ERM, or just switch back to DRM. This has the benefit that everyone knows what it is, albeit perhaps without positive connotation.

If we want more accuracy in product category naming, I suggest considering something around the notion of "object control" or "data control" or maybe something a bit fancier like "data" or "content shield".

Ultimately, the thing that matters is that people know what you are talking about.