incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Alexandro Colorado <>
Subject Re: [Proposal] Renaming of
Date Tue, 18 Oct 2011 16:26:24 GMT
On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 11:17 AM, Kay Schenk <> wrote:

> On 10/18/2011 01:29 AM, Ian Lynch wrote:
>> On 18 October 2011 03:55, Andreas S�ger<>  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:
>>> But then Apache OpenOffice(TM) would get round that. One possibility
>>> would
>> be to Trademark Apache OpenOffice alongside 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 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
> as
> its current DNS name
> -- and, as Dennis pointed out, despite the common use of OpenOffice in
> speech, 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
> a change is HUGE headache.
> Couple that with recent information about the Apache podling --
> -- 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.


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

*Alexandro Colorado*
** Español
fingerprint: E62B CF77 1BEA 0749 C0B8 50B9 3DE6 A84A 68D0 72E6

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