incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Wolf Halton <>
Subject Re: selling open office
Date Wed, 29 Feb 2012 17:50:53 GMT
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 9:28 AM, Shane Curcuru <> wrote:
> On 2012-02-28 12:23 PM, flamin hotdog wrote:
>> hi, i was wondering where you stand on people selling open office. i know
>> of somebody who is selling open office on ebay for profit.
>> thanks andy
> As other folks have commented, the Apache License is designed to be
> permissive, in that third parties may take code under that license and use
> it for all sorts of activities.  This includes selling derivative software
> products based on our Apache licensed code, as well as charging a fee for
> providing CDs, training, consulting, and other activities based on actual
> Apache software products.
> One of the main restrictions in the Apache License is that it does *not*
> grant rights to the trademarks - i.e. the brand names, logos, etc. -
> associated with the software products using this license.
> Legal issues always depend on all the details around each specific case, so
> it's very difficult to provide general advice.  But in general third parties
> can charge for providing customers with copies of Apache licensed software
> products *as long as* they don't attempt to misuse the trademarks of the
> original producer of the software product.
> ----
> In general, lengthy discussions of cases of license or trademark abuse are
> not helpful unless a (P)PMC can define a *specific* legal question, which
> can then be brought to the appropriate officer of the ASF or ASF counsel for
> legal advice.
> Folks who want to learn more about the ASF's polices are strongly urged to
> read the actual license and trademark policies, along with the FAQs linked
> from their pages:
> - Shane
>  Apache OpenOffice mentor

So Shane,
When a 3rd-party organization wants to know how they can use the
Apache Open Office Name and trademark with their current project, they
should contact to see what will be allowed on
the current project.  Is that right?  Each project stands on its own
merits so each project would be handled separately.  Thus, the
pre-decided answer and the faq would be that the code can be used and
modified as per the ASL and requests to use the Trademarks and Service
Marks are always handled through Trademarks@.  Is that right?
That cuts down on the jawboning about this issue, which on a public,
archived forum is itself a sort of advertising of the 3rd-party
project in question.


This Apt Has Super Cow Powers -
Advancing Libraries Together -

View raw message