incubator-ooo-marketing mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Marcus (OOo)" <>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] Product Branding
Date Thu, 03 Nov 2011 00:19:53 GMT
Am 11/03/2011 12:32 AM, schrieb Rob Weir:
> On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 6:14 PM, Terry<>  wrote:
>> I gather that what you want to achieve is preservation of the 'name' ''
as a trademark and as an identifier.  Eventually people will know that the Apache product
is derived from the old software but the need to protect the old trademark
will persist.
> It is one option.  I think it is worth discussing.  It might be a
> reasonable compromise that we can achieve consensus on, to use both
> names in some coherent way, like "Coca-Cola" and "Coke" are both
> trademarks for the same thing.

I'm pretty sure we can find a way to use both.

>> I am hesitant to say that the Apache product is the software formerly known as
because LibreOffice can also make that claim.  I gather that LibreOffice folk regard the Apache
product as another fork of  I'm not certain of the history but I understand
that LibreOffice is the former go-oo but that was a fork of oo.o anyway.
> I would not hesitate to say that Apache is based on
> It is true statement.  If LO is offended by true statements than that
> is their problem, not ours.

Yes, the history is done and the well-known fact are certain. But we can 
change the future and our way and behavior how to work together.

>> What about a statement along the lines " and Apache Open Office[/Office/Suite]
are {registered ?} trademarks of the Apache Software Foundation which produces Apache Open
Office {derived from oo.o} ?"  Something like that could be used as a subtitle.
> That sounds like a legal notice.  I think we want to discuss first the
> branding strategy.  Once we agree on that the legal notice will follow
> trivially.
> In any case, the important question is how we would use both
> trademarks in our marketing efforts.  Merely saying the trademarks
> exist is not really using them.  If we're not really using
> as a trademark then eventually (3 years I think) it is
> considered abandoned.

I repeat my suggestion on this list:

Let's build a roof on "" for all Office suites that 
are based on Then the trademark is used often enough to 
keep the rights reserved.

- and -

Every peer should be happy as they can use this portal to give some 
information, to be a part of the Office family and to link back to their 
real project and product home.


>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From: Rob Weir<>
>>> To:
>>> Cc:
>>> Sent: Wednesday, 2 November 2011 10:37 PM
>>> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Product Branding
>>> On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 6:12 PM, Terry<>
>>> wrote:
>>>>   I agree that ownership of the '' brand should be
>>> preserved; allowing someone else to use it would create confusion.
>>> It is possible to have several trademarks in use at the same time.
>>> You see that in complex branding strategies for consumer products,
>>> where image is very important.  For example, the Coca Cola corporation
>>> protects "Coca Cola" (of course) but also "Coke" and several
>>> slogans like "Can't beat the real thing" and "I'd like to buy the
>>> world a Coke".  I assume the corporation has complex internal rules that
>>> determine how advertisers use use each name in the proper context.
>>> Would something like this make sense for OpenOffice?  Is there a way
>>> to rationalize the use of both names?  Or would that cause confusion
>>> among our own users?
>>> "Apache OpenOffice for your organization:"
>>> -Rob
>>>>>   <snip>
>>>>>   My one concern with this name is its effect on the existing
>>>>> trademark registration.  If we call ourselves
>>>>> "Apache OpenOffice" and never as "" what happens
>>>>> to the>>>    existing trademark?  Is it considered abandoned?
 Can anyone then use
>>>>> it?  Can  we prevent someone from causing confusion by adopting that
name for a
>>>>>   similar product?
>>>>>   To put it in perspective, when Oracle announced that it was
>>>>>   contributing OOo to Apache, within a week a company attempted to
>>>>>   register the trademark "OpenOffice" in the US.  The value of our brand
>>>>>   is significant enough to attract scams.
>>>>>   Considering the past abuse that has been attempted against this brand,
>>>>>   and the likely future repetitions of the same, I think that it is
>>>>>   critical that we have some way to protect ourselves and our users
>>>>>   against confusing misuse of the names OpenOffice,, Open
>>>>>   Office, etc., in the usual variations.
>>>>>   For example,  would Apache actually register "Apache OpenOffice" as
>>>>>   US trademark?
>>>>>   So in summary, I like the shorter name "Apache OpenOffice" better than
>>>>>   "Apache".  But I just want to make sure we don't
>>>>>   lose the effective benefits and priority of the existing
>>>>>   trademark registration.
>>>>>   -Rob

View raw message