incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Louis Suárez-Potts <>
Subject Re: OOo Business...
Date Thu, 10 Nov 2011 20:34:28 GMT
Thanks, Rob, Dave. I would suggest that when queries come to us we a)
point them to a flux page (a wiki, say) and ultimately to the
lists/persons Dave mentions. The emphasis must be on the new context:
Apache. As OOo gets rather a lot of these, I'd further suggest we
consider doing what we did at OOo, and pretty much automate the
*request* process, if not the *granting* one. (Example of request: I
want to promote and put the logo on my site. Can I? or,
I want to issue CDROMs and charge for media and labour and use the
logo and trademark: Can I? Both these queries can be answered with

On 10 November 2011 15:02, Dave Fisher <> wrote:
> On Nov 10, 2011, at 11:48 AM, Louis Suárez-Potts wrote:
>> I continue (naturally) to receive many requests from businesses (small
>> and large) to use the trademarked "" logo. I generally
>> pass on these, as there seemed, until very recently, a mystery on how
>> to proceed. I'm still in need of enlightenment, and would appreciate
>> some guidance.
>> * I think it's pointless to endorse "" at this point.
>> The probable name of its successor will be "Apache OpenOffice" or some
>> variant thereof. And that new name will come into play very soon
>> indeed. We will need to progressively inform all those using the old
>> logo/name/trademark to switch over with new installation sets.
> It is not pointless. We plan to keep this registered trademark and domain regardless
of the product name.

We *want* to have both and Apache OpenOffice (if that's
what comes down)? That seems a little confusing, don't you think?

Or do you mean to say, "We want to advocate and promote the use of
"Apache OpenOffice" or whatever, while also silently holding on to the
legacy name and trademark"?

>> * I would therefore like to be able to respond to those requesting use
>> of the trademark, etc., to wait a little bit, and then to return to
>> us—preferably to a wiki or even better, an automated service, such as
>> we used on OOo, for this. (The automated service allowed us to docket
>> requests and act more expeditiously, while also giving room for more
>> fully understanding the request. Otherwise, the requests were simply
>> sent to a list I set up for this and which John, Florian, and I
>> managed for several years, though it really seems like an eternity—and
>> John was doing much of the work.)
> I may be wrong, but trademark requests need to go to the PPMC. Since these are private
matters - ooo-private@i.a.o. Requests will be evaluated and forwarded to trademarks@a.o for
approval. This is the current process which we've used in one or two cases.

As I mentioned at the top, the sheer volume would dictate a different
strategy. Think Mozilla popularity among endusers. And keep in mind
that OOo differs from many Apache projects (podling or not) in wearing
a benign user face (user friendly, like); indeed, the vast majority of
those coming to the site were there to get the app, not to make it.
(Sigh.) I know that will change—yay—but what won't change will be its
relative popularity, though of course some will prefer LibreOffice.
>> —
>> I also receive many (well, a few) requests and inquiries about
>> contributing to code. (Rob has been included in one
>> such.) Right now, it's a little easier to tell people what to do—join
>> Apache's lists for OOo in the Incubator, participate, contribute. But
>> not all requests are quite so simple. For instance, what about
>> templates? Extensions? I have no problem with telling people to join
>> the lists where the contributions are, and to proceed according to the
>> Apache way (tao of apache?) but perhaps there are other answers I
>> should give? (Oh, and I have no problem whatsoever with others taking
>> on this role. I've just been doing it as an extension of my previous
>> existence modulo OOo, not as an assertion of nonexistent authority.)
> We've yet to find a volunteer to take the lead on dealing with these overloaded Drupal
servers at OSUOSL.

I would suggest we articulate a better version of what we had with
OOo—more open, perhaps—and I would help in finding someone to assist
here. The Extensions repository is of real importance, and not just
for OOo. It's where a lot of contributors go, as OOo remains
formidable for many, but the extensions do not.

The people who made Extensions so good are mostly here, on the Apache
lists: Juergen, for one, did a lot of great work.

So: I suggest we need to clarify, using a wiki, the trademark policy
*at present* and as it may evolve.

Rob's suggestion,


I'd recommend something like this:

1) Have the person who wants to use the trademark check this page and
make sure they really need permission.  In some cases ("nominative
use") no permission is required.

2) If they actually do require permission, then they should send the
request to this ooo-dev list.  If there was something especially
sensitive (unannounced product plans or similar), they could send the
request to ooo-private,  We would discuss and decide if we (the PPMC)
supported the request or not.

3) If we supported the request, then we would send our recommendation
to the Apache VP of Branding, who makes the final decision.

(We should really write up this procedure)


is a start, but having lived through the email flood that comes from
this—and having understood that asking people to subscribe for this
sort of request is not the best remedy for a user app like OOo, I'd
suggest something like what we had on OOo or that Mozilla uses, a
process by which requests are automatically docketed via form filled
out by the requester and if the nature of the request merits it, are
individually scrutinized for approval.

I further suggest that we start itemizing a list of things That Need to Be Done.

> Regards,
> Dave


View raw message