incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Kay Schenk <kay.sch...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [Proposal] Renaming of OpenOffice.org
Date Tue, 18 Oct 2011 22:53:57 GMT


On 10/18/2011 02:58 PM, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 6:17 PM, Kay Schenk<kay.schenk@gmail.com>  wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On 10/18/2011 01:29 AM, Ian Lynch wrote:
>>
>>> On 18 October 2011 03:55, Andreas S�ger<villeroy@t-online.de>   wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>   Am 18.10.2011 01:35, Carl Marcum wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Since we already need to do some re-branding for adding Apache, I think
>>>>> we should drop the .org which I believe was only there because
>>>>> OpenOffice was already trademarked.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> And still is: http://www.openoffice.nl/
>>>>
>>>> But then Apache OpenOffice(TM) would get round that. One possibility
>>>> would
>>>>
>>> be to Trademark Apache OpenOffice alongside OpenOffice.org and publicly
>>> declare they are referring to the same thing. Gradually replace as many
>>> instances of OOo with AOO as is practically possible while the first code
>>> release is in preparation. Design logos ready (they don't have to be
>>> released immediately but designing them and deciding which to use takes
>>> time
>>> and we don't want to be rushed into that at the last minute). On the first
>>> code release announce the official consolidation to Apache Open Office.
>>> Putting things off is not going to help in making a smooth transition and
>>> will detract from the impact of that initial release when it happens. It
>>> is
>>> a marketing event that has to be planned because it is a one off
>>> opportunity.
>>>
>>> John said that everyone now knows that OpenOffice.org is an Apache
>>> product.
>>> I very much doubt that is true. Most end-users I have talked to have no
>>> idea
>>> what LibreOffice is, the Document Foundation or Apache. We have to think
>>> in
>>> terms of consumers with AOO/OOo. Most are not geeks, most don't even know
>>> there was a product called Star Office or that Sun was bought by Oracle.
>>> This is why marketing is a very different game to developing code.
>>>
>>> I accept that it might take a while to sort out the best timing to make
>>> any
>>> trademark changes but we do need to make a decision in principle so
>>> everyone
>>> can refer consistently to one agreed set of terminology even if it is only
>>> for internal use to start with.
>>>
>>
>> OH boy. Well the discussion is getting complicated.
>>
>> Consider this--
>>
>> We ahd agreed to keep the "user facing" web site for Apache OpenOffice.org
>>
>> as www.openoffice.org
>>
>> its current DNS name
>>
>> -- and, as Dennis pointed out, despite the common use of OpenOffice in
>> speech, openoffice.org is THE recognizable entity and reference in all
>> printed communication.  In previous discussion, it's been repeatedly pointed
>> out, that in terms of what's already been developed for "the brand" -- see
>> the Marketing Project materials at http://marketing.openoffice.**org/<http://marketing.openoffice.org/>
>>
>> a change is HUGE headache.
>>
>> Couple that with recent information about the Apache podling --
>> OpenOffice.org -- and I truly feel that a re-branding/trademarking *at this
>> stage of development* would not be good, and could potentially be harmful in
>> terms of identification.
>>
>> Shane has suggested the PPMC should deal with this -- fine. And Rob has
>> suggested the new marketing head (team) should deal with it -- maybe also
>> fine. Maybe a nice compromise would let the "marketing area" suggest
>> something to the PPMC.
>>
>>
> +1, well summarized
>
> and i would like to add some point. We have a widely accepted brand name
> OpenOffice.org and the trademark is also owned by the ASF. And registering a
> new worldwide trademark is quite expensive, so why should we do that at the
> moment?
>
> I would much more prefer if more people would concentrate on the real work
> that we have to achieve at the moment. That is first working on a first
> release as soon as possible to send out a signal to our users that OOo is a
> healthy project. Second achieve the transition of form a community
> perspective necessary services like the forum, the wiki, the extension and
> template repo and the web page as main entrance for our existing as well as
> new users.
>
> When we have a running and working project and nothing to do else we can
> again think about a rebrand. And if we decide to do that it becomes
> hopefully more successful than renaming a stoc symbol SUN to JAVA ;-)

I could NOT agree more! +1

>
> Juergen
>

-- 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
MzK

"There is no such thing as coincidence."
            -- Leroy Jethro Gibbs, Rule #39

Mime
View raw message