I'm not worried about people noticing the similarity in names.  I already expect people will notice both.  I just want to make sure no one mistakenly assumes real association between the two "projects." 

At least that one is called "The Armory" and I am just "Armory." 

Armories are usually highly-secured buildings full of weapons and tools.  You could consider the capabilities of Armory as "weapons" or "armor" for dealing with Bitcoin attackers.   Or, the focus is more on the "fortified building" aspect, not the weapons.  

And of course, it's not necessary for names/trademarks to match the exact nature of what they represent.  Just the gist of it (or not all: there's millions of companies that use a name that has no relationship to what it represents:  what about "Microsoft"?).  If I had known an illegal weapons marketplace would open with the same name, I might have considered something different...

*sigh*. The issue with the names is public perception. It really isn't going to take someone in the press very long to note the similarity in the names, and with the amount of FUD we've all seen out there regarding Bitcoin it will be short work for someone to make Armory = The Armory to the public and make it stick. Of all the fucktardedly stupid things to do to help derail Bitcoin this has to be one of the best. My understanding is that eto is trying to make this appeal to the mass public at large and hence get widespread adoption of Bitcoin. Having this awesome client even remotely tied to weapons dealing is a good way to kill it with the general public. My advice is to change the name of this project, quickly.

edit: And if you want, you can get the community involved in the renaming part. Make a thread, get the best 5 or 10 ideas, assign them each an address and let people vote with bitcoins. Name that has the most coins wins.

Well, I will happily take suggestions and go from there.  Perhaps if I get some good recommendations I will consider.  Unfortuantely, I'm leaving town for a week and I have no time to deal with this right now.  And re-branding will be no trivial task.  "Armory" is all over this project

this is a good point.  The Armory may not even be around in 6 mo.  their biz probably borders on illegal altho this is just a guess. 

don't worry about it.  you have way more important things to focus on.

LOL, nice title change!

Guess what I forgot to do for a whole week? (busy busy busy)
http://blockchain.info/tx-index/2949632/fff6a336eed0fa1c28dff3f6c24bf3b64c2102fc60e202567a2f1fa2606ce9f5
Hope that's enough for that seminar :|

Thanks Indemnified!

With the recent, high-profile BTC thefts, I have updated this thread to more-directly market Armory as the solution.  It sounds like the only reason Slush didn't lose more money, was because he was using cold-storage for most of his funds.  Multi-signature transactions would help, but they are stalled indefinitely.  And, most users do not have the patience or skill to figure out "cold-storage" on their own, which is where Armory shines!  I guess I should rename Armory Offline Wallets to Armory Cold-Storage Solutions! 

So, I am bumping my own thread with a title change, in hope of really highlighting why users should be interested in Armory.  I think even after multi-signature transactions are enabled, offline wallets will be the best way to protect yourself, even against highly-targeted attackers.

Note: I am on vacation until the end of the week, and it appears I have introduced a send-tx bug into Armory just before I left (in version 0.55-alpha)!  Gah!  If you are trying out Armory for the first time and you try to send Bitcoins from your Armory wallet, you will get an error that it was not accepted by the network:  but the transaction did go through!  Just be patient and wait a few blocks (Armory still collects new block information, but it won't acknowledge the transaction until it appears in the blockchain).  When I get back from vacation, I will be fixing the bug! 

i can't wait until you get this thing locked down and solid.  what a great wallet.