incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Rob Weir <robw...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Powered by AOO (was Re: selling open office)
Date Wed, 29 Feb 2012 13:48:46 GMT
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 8:33 AM, Ross Gardler
<rgardler@opendirective.com> wrote:
> On 29 February 2012 12:54, Rob Weir <robweir@apache.org> wrote:
>> On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 4:34 AM, Ross Gardler
>> <rgardler@opendirective.com> wrote:
>>> On 28 February 2012 20:01, Donald Whytock <dwhytock@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> There was talk of a "Powered by AOO" logo.  Maybe this should be
>>>> propogated up to the foundation to have an "Apache Inside" logo?
>>>
>>> No, that is not how it (currently) works around here. Providing a
>>> foundation wide "Apache inside" logo doesn't seem to make sense to me.
>>> It means that huge numbers of Java applications would have "Apache
>>> inside" because of the almost universal use of the various Commons
>>> libraries. I can't speak for the Trademarks committee but I very much
>>> doubt they would want to take on managing such a situation. If you
>>> want to challenge that opinion the right place to do it is
>>> trademarks@a.o
>>>
>>> It is critical that AOO recognises that each project is responsible
>>> for their own trademark management beyond the standard Apache policy.
>>> Trademarks@ is there to provide support when necessary, but this PPMC
>>> is responsible for day to day management. The AOO project ***needs***
>>> "powered by" or whatever. Without one it is extremely difficult to
>>> have satisfactory arrangements with organisations like Team OOo. The
>>> project mentors have been saying this since the very beginning of the
>>> project yet nobody has yet created such a logo and accompanying
>>> policy.
>>>
>>
>
> ...

Ross, the part you conveniently snipped here was where I said the PPMC
does have a policy here.  It is on the website.  Using the trademarks
requires PPMC permission and this is evaluated on a case-by-case
basis.  This would include any one who wanted to use a "powered by
logo".  Our policy is that would be reviewed on a case-by-case basis.
This is not lack of policy.  This is just that default policy that the
vast majority of TLP and podlings have today.

And this does not in any way prevent or hinder someone from reusing
the 3.4 release. Take a look at any other Apache release, say
Subversion.  They have plenty of 3rd party ports and derived products.
 But they are not using a "powered by logo". I don't see a problem
here.

Note: I'm certainly open to such a logo if you, or anyone else, wants
to contribute one.  But I don't think this is a priority right now,
and the actions of other PPMC members suggests that they agree.

>
>> Maybe a better example would be the FreeBSD port?  That does not have
>> the extraneous issues that we had with TOO.
>
> Sure, if you prefer.
>
>> but the advice we received
>> early on was to handle these case-by-case for a while, so we get a
>> sense of what kinds of requests will be coming in and what kinds of
>> issues arise.  Writing a policy in a vacuum without that experience
>> would be folly, IMHO.
>
> Agreed. But the advice from at least three mentors, possibly more, on
> a number of specific cases has been "use a powered by policy". Each
> time it has been mentioned it seems to have been met with general
> agreement (at least no objections).
>
>> In any case, if you are uncertain as to whether there is a podling
>> release policy related to "powered by" logos, I'd be happy to raise
>> this on the general@incubator list.  Surely, if there were such a
>> policy, written or unwritten, someone on the IPMC would be able to
>> point us to previous invocations of that rule.
>
> I am not saying anything about release policies. I'm suggesting that
> the lack of a "powered by AOO" logo and policy might be considered a
> blocker for the 3.4 release. I'm suggesting that the provision of such
> might simplify the reuse of AOO 3.4. That's the goal, right? The IPMC
> does not have a policy relating to "powered by" and its relationship
> to releases. It is entirely up to the PPMC to decide what is/is not a
> blocker.
>
> The trademarks committee does have guidance on "powered by"
> approaches. There is a specifc FAQ entry on the powered by topic, I'm
> not sure it has ever been pointed to explicitly so here you go: "May I
> use Apache Powered by... marks or logos in software product names or
> logos?" http://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/faq/#poweredby
>
> Ross

Mime
View raw message