incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Danese Cooper <dan...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: OpenOffice.org (was Re: Ooo blog)
Date Mon, 11 Jul 2011 17:41:30 GMT
On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 10:21 AM, Daniel Shahaf <d.s@daniel.shahaf.name>wrote:

> Javier Sola wrote on Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 18:43:17 +0700:
> > If Apache forced this without discussion it would be a bad start for
> > the project.
>
> You're misportraying the facts; it's a preexisting Apache policy that
> predates OOo being proposed as a podling.
>
> Now, we're generally reasonable people here, and the podling can always
> request an exception (talk to trademarks@).  But, with my Member hat on,
> this collective "Let's join Apache, but not be called Apache, and not
> work with existing Apache entities" spirit leaves a rather bad taste.
>

Ah Daniel, many of these folks didn't "ask" to join Apache.  This is a
situation that has been rare at Apache until now (modulo Apache Subversion).
 Normally a project is obscure when it starts at Apache and the only job is
to find a name nobody has used before.  OpenOffice.org is a very valuable
brand worldwide...possibly equal to Apache in value.  As a Member (and
Mentor of this project) I think the right thing to do is to use the Apache
prefix along with the (regrettable but established) .org suffix. I do think
ASF should ask trademark law counsel whether doing so would be considered
dilution of the brand, however.

Danese

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message