incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Shane Curcuru <...@shanecurcuru.org>
Subject Re: [Proposal] Give the BHV publishing house in Kaarst/Germany the permission to use the OpenOffice.org trademark and logo
Date Mon, 29 Aug 2011 00:16:50 GMT
(Apologies; I've been planning a funeral and then fleeing a hurricane. 
Note that this thread spans both private and public lists)

In general I first refer people to our policies or any published FAQs, 
and I believe this one should cover the case and make everyone happy:

   http://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/faq/#booktitle

Note that while we certainly take input from (P)PMCs very strongly, 
official permissions for trademark use should only be granted by 
officers of the ASF - typically myself, or in specific and documented 
kinds of cases, the VP of a relevant TLP project.

Getting a sense of what a (P)PMC thinks by lazy consensus is fine, but 
we shouldn't answer legal or related questions without a specific [VOTE] 
or without an ASF officer making the final determination.

In this particular case, presuming that the PPMC is happy with this kind 
of usage, I don't see any issues at all - especially since it's a 
publisher that's been doing this (presumably with permission) in the past.

I'm happy to take the PPMC's suggestion about asking for the title to be 
"Apache ..." or just "..."; since it's about a specific product version, 
it should use the name of the product version it's about.

NOTE! Any attributions the publisher provides should be to The Apache 
Software Foundation, and not to Oracle.  If the publisher wants to add a 
note in the preface or some similar place that mentions the fact that 
OpenOffice.org has moved to the ASF, that'd be great as well.  8-)

- Shane

On 8/28/2011 2:40 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote:
> Hi Peter,
>
> For your lazy consensus, when is the expiration at which time you
> propose to act?
>
> Also, because this is a matter involving legalities, I'm not sure
> lazy consensus works here.  We need to check with the
> trademark-policy folks to understand what the ceremony is.  I suspect
> that any permission must come from them, not one of us.  But they may
> want the recommendation of the PPMC, which is what the lazy consensus
> would then be for.
>
> It may be that the publisher does not require specific permission
> from us: See<http://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/faq/#booktitle>.
> But if they do, or if as a publisher they are wary of not having an
> explicit agreement, I think it needs to come from an officer of ASF.
>
> Since this is our first try at this, I have copied the trademarks@
> address.
>
> - Dennis
>
> HMMM...
>
> Also, and this is probably not the right time for this (especially
> for OpenOffice.org 3.3), we might want to come up with a request (or
> requirement?) that publishers include a link to locations under our
> support where current information, updates, and support about
> OpenOffice.org can be found.  (That would be separate from links the
> publisher might provide for updates on their book and on the 10,000+
> templates that are provided on the DVD.)
>
> We also, now that I think about it, need to provide information in
> our distros and maybe for use in print, about the availability of
> source code for a specific release and for information on source code
> for other releases, including the latest.
>
> [I think I will flag these two as notes-to-self for something we need
> to pay attention to.  The specific source-code-availability
> requirement may not be so strict under ALv2 and Apache practice, in
> contrast with the LGPL requirement.  It seems like a great thing to
> perpetuate, regardless.  It is another reason to keep the
> openoffice.org domain name operating because of linking from material
> in print as well as on-line.]
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Peter Junge [mailto:peter.junge@gmx.org]
> Sent: Sunday, August 28, 2011 09:33
> To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Cc: kraft@bhv.de
> Subject: [Proposal] Give the BHV publishing house in Kaarst/Germany the permission to
use the OpenOffice.org trademark and logo
>
> Hi,
>
> I would like to propose --*seeking lazy consensus*-- that the BHV
> publishing GmbH, Novesiastrasse 60, D-41564 Kaarst (Germany) is
> permitted to use the OpenOffice.org logo and trademark for their book
> (in preparation) "OpenOffice.org 3.3 für Ein- und Umsteiger" [1] [2],
> means something like "OOo 3.3 for beginners and people who are
> migrating" in English. This package includes a handbook (printed and
> eBook) and a DVD with the OOo binaries. The OOo logo and trademark would
> be used on the book cover, within the book and on the label of the DVD.
> BHV has been publishing similar books for previous versions of OOo for
> many years, e.g. [3].
>
> I would like to advocate granting the OOo logo usage to BHV, as such
> books foster the public visibility of OOo.
>
> Mr. Ralf Kraft, representing BHV (nit subscribed to this ML) is on CC.
> (NOTE: The mock-up of the cover is still using the old OOo logo, but I
> already have been pointing out to Mr. Kraft that using the latest logo
> [4] would be preferred.)
>
> Best regards,
> Peter
>
> [1] http://dl.dropbox.com/u/8268859/OpenOfficeSkribble.jpg
> [2] http://dl.dropbox.com/u/8268859/PI-OpenOfficeV33Pro.odt (including
> ISBN code)
> [3] http://www.amazon.de/dp/3826673476?m=A3JWKAKR8XB7XF&tag=idealoversand-21
> [4] http://about.openoffice.org/index.html#logo
>


Mime
View raw message