Mailing-List: contact ooo-marketing-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: ooo-marketing@incubator.apache.org
Received-SPF: neutral (athena.apache.org: local policy)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws;
  s=s1024; d=yahoo.com.au;
  h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Mailer:References:Message-ID:Date:From:Reply-To:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type;
  b=JSrgof9fdI1cgAv3r6mQmA/nsChb0xbmDmyCsnHbK05Wi6xm84lAArTN5SLUjgvErs1qzxQdAAmIj6y+iYs4ADuoxWphm1p40wDEGK60tybK8ChCEWL5QyoHwGa6Q6+cZRI8/eYwyLbI81RaYRpj2tMJoU78oJ0Bt8tGf0axel0=;
References: 
 <CAP-ksohR7fOYUFn+nn7EUGVMLYzp+vZ-HRHMOLrZynX2Rk548Q@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <1319674507.51265.YahooMailNeo@web161701.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2011 17:15:07 -0700 (PDT)
From: Terry <terauck-aoomarket@yahoo.com.au>
Reply-To: Terry <terauck-aoomarket@yahoo.com.au>
Subject: Re: Branding of the 3.4 release
To: "ooo-marketing@incubator.apache.org" <ooo-marketing@incubator.apache.org>
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAP-ksohR7fOYUFn+nn7EUGVMLYzp+vZ-HRHMOLrZynX2Rk548Q@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
 boundary="1478469582-840761335-1319674507=:51265"

--1478469582-840761335-1319674507=:51265
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

It seems to me that there is no mystery about the name.=A0 'OpenOffice' is =
a familiar term.=A0 'OpenOffice.org' was used only in public writing and th=
en only because another entity owned the term 'OpenOffice'.=A0 There is no =
longer a need to use '.org' because any generic term used to describe the s=
oftware will be coupled with 'Apache'.=0A=0AThe term 'openoffice.org' could=
 be used as a keyword on web pages.=A0 Any reference to 'Apache Office' or =
'Apache OpenOffice' can be accompanied by a reference to the origin of the =
software as 'OpenOffice.org'.=A0 After a few years, such accompaniment may =
no longer be required.=0A=0ARegarding the choice between 'Apache Office' an=
d 'Apache OpenOffice', I know from years spent visiting forums and mailing =
lists that people commonly refer to the software as 'OpenOffice'.=A0 The us=
e of that term in conjunction with 'Apache' identifies the software for man=
y people.=0A=0ATerry=0A=0A=0A>________________________________=0A>From: Rob=
 Weir <robweir@apache.org>=0A>To: ooo-marketing@incubator.apache.org=0A>Sen=
t: Thursday, 27 October 2011 6:06 AM=0A>Subject: Branding of the 3.4 releas=
e=0A>=0A><snip>=0A>=0A>One of the things we need to figure out for the 3.4 =
release is how we=0A>brand the product.=A0 Name and logo.=0A>=0A>As most of=
 you know, Oracle had the registered trademark for=0A>"OpenOffice.org" as w=
ell as the logo trademark.=A0 These now belong to=0A>Apache.=0A>=0A>However=
, we cannot continue calling the product "OpenOffice.org"=0A>because that d=
oes not comply with Apache branding requirements [1].=0A>Apache products mu=
st be called "Apache X" (for some value of X).=0A>=0A>So possible names are=
:=0A>=0A>a) Apache OpenOffice.org=0A>=0A>b) Apache OpenOffice=0A>=0A>c) Apa=
che Office=0A>=0A>d) Apache <fill in the blank>=0A>=0A>Could we resolve thi=
s question, hopefully without excess bloodshed,=0A>within the next 6 weeks?=
=A0 I think we need to resolve it that quickly=0A>in order to get the new b=
randing applied to the 3.4 release.=0A>=0A>Also, if at all possible, could =
we have an initial discussion on "how"=0A>we will decide this?=A0 What tech=
niques, what data, what form of=0A>argument or analysis will be persuasive =
to us and lead to the best=0A>results?=A0 It won't help at all (I fear) if =
we just all respond with=0A>our preferred name based or anecdotal evidence.=
=A0 That probably will=0A>not lead us to consensus.=0A>=0A>In any case, wel=
come to the ooo-marketing list.=A0 Enjoy!=0A>=0A>Regards,=0A>=0A>-Rob=0A>=
=0A>[1] http://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/pmcs.html=0A>=0A>=0A>
--1478469582-840761335-1319674507=:51265--