incubator-ooo-marketing mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Rob Weir <>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] Product Branding
Date Wed, 02 Nov 2011 23:32:37 GMT
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 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.

> 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

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.


> Terry
> ----- 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 a
>>>>  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