incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Christoph Jopp <j...@gmx.de>
Subject Re: OpenOffice.org (was Re: Ooo blog)
Date Sun, 10 Jul 2011 23:20:06 GMT
Am 10.07.2011 20:19, schrieb Donald Harbison:
> No need to drag the .org into the future, if Apache is prefixed. If no
> prefix, yes, we lead with the trademark of record: OpenOffice.org. IMHO.
> Let's simply use Apache OpenOffice.

I might be totally wrong (especially as I'm not a lawyer) but there
still might be a need to keep the .org.

The worldwide trademark is on OpenOffice.org and the Suffix
distinguishes it from OpenOffice or similar trademarks.

The prefix Apache also distinguishes it from OpenOffice but also from
OpenOffice.org (especially without further using the Suffix .org).

So does using just Apache OpenOffice not mean to drop the worldwide
trademark?

Whether Apache OpenOffice.org suffices the "old" trademark might answer
a lawyer.

The danger might be that not using the OpenOffice.org trademark means
losing it. At least in Germany a trademark can be deregistered if the
owner doesn't use it for five consecutive years. And then registered of
a new user/owner.


> 
> On Jul 10, 2011 1:27 PM, "Marcus (OOo)" <marcus.mail@wtnet.de> wrote:
>> OK, to let the name start with "Apache" seems to be a requirement.
>>
>> Am I right when I see more people saying that it should be named "Apache
>> OpenOffice.org" and not "Apache OpenOffice"?
>>
>> BTW:
>> I don't want to get rid of the ".org" extension on any price. Due to the
>> new Apache home I just wanted to talk about the possibility.
>>
>> Marcus
>>
>>
>>
>> Am 07/09/2011 02:34 PM, schrieb Rob Weir:
>>> 2011/7/9 Pavel Janík<Pavel@janik.cz>:
>>>>> Why? Out of the folk on the OOo forum who expressed an opinion to me,
> no one liked it. It was a perpetual reminder that the product couldn't be
> called what they really wanted it to be called: OpenOffice. I greatly prefer
> Apache OpenOffice to Apache OpenOffice.org.
>>>>
>>>> The product and the project WAS OpenOffice.org. If we want to change it,
> then why not directly Apache Office?
>>>> --
>>>
>>> Or if everyone likes the ".org" we could call it "(Apache.org
>>> OpenOffice.org).org"
>>>
>>> But seriously, the ".org" was added to make the name unique. It also
>>> occurred during the .com bubble when making your product sound
>>> internetty would make your stock price quadruple over night. So we
>>> ended up with a lot of silly names back then.
>>>
>>> Today, however, the original reason for adding the ".org" no longer
>>> exists. And instead of sounding cool, it sounds very retro, so very
>>> 2001. On the other hand, we have a generation of pedants who enjoy
>>> correcting users who almost always just call the product "OpenOffice",
>>> oblivious any attempts to enlighten them about how some Dutch company
>>> they never heard of was also called OpenOffice. So regardless of what
>>> we do, users will continue calling the product "OpenOffice".
>>>
>>> You can reading the Apache requirements for product branding and
>>> naming here: http://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/pmcs.html#naming
>>>
>>> Quoting from there: "The primary branding for any project or product
>>> name must be in the form of 'Apache Foo'. This ensures that the
>>> project or product is associated with the ASF and the project in the
>>> minds of our users. The first and most prominent reference to a
>>> project or product on each page must use the 'Apache Foo' form of its
>>> name. Other references may use either 'Apache Foo' or 'Foo' as
>>> appropriate for the subject matter."
>>>
>>> So the branding will need to include "Apache". It seems the logical
>>> choices are either:
>>>
>>> "Apache OpenOffice.org"
>>>
>>> or
>>>
>>> "Apache OpenOffice"
>>>
>>>
>>> Personally, I think the first name is ponderous and ugly.
> 


Mime
View raw message