Mailing-List: contact ooo-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of marcus.mail@wtnet.de
 designates 213.209.103.13 as permitted sender)
Message-ID: <4ED419BD.1030407@wtnet.de>
Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2011 00:31:09 +0100
From: "Marcus (OOo)" <marcus.mail@wtnet.de>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686 (x86_64); de;
 rv:1.9.2.20) Gecko/20110804 Thunderbird/3.1.12
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: What about BrOffice?
References: 
 <1904178027-1322506653-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-1938538475-@b15.c15.bise7.blackberry>
 <4ED41137.8070000@openoffice.org>
In-Reply-To: <4ED41137.8070000@openoffice.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Am 11/28/2011 11:54 PM, schrieb Andrea Pescetti:
> Jomar Silva wrote:
>> We had to use BrOffice as the product name because OpenOffice
>> was a registered trademark in Brazil, and AFAIK Apache OpenOffice
>> will not have problems here.
>
> If I recall correctly, the issue about "OpenOffice" being a registered
> trademark (by some entity different than OpenOffice.org/Oracle) in
> Brazil had been solved in recent times, but the Brazilian community had
> preferred to keep the "BrOffice" name since it was a stronger brand
> (even though, apparently, they did get rid of the BrOffice name later).
>
> So "Apache OpenOffice" should not be problematic, since even the mere
> "OpenOffice" should be OK for Brazil now (provided I recall correctly
> some discussions from last year).

Yes, your recall is right. I just wasn't that detailed in my previous mail.

Marcus