openoffice-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dave Fisher <>
Subject Re: (was Re: Ooo blog)
Date Mon, 11 Jul 2011 17:46:17 GMT

On Jul 11, 2011, at 10:41 AM, Danese Cooper wrote:

> On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 10:21 AM, Daniel Shahaf <>wrote:
>> Javier Sola wrote on Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 18:43:17 +0700:
>>> If Apache forced this without discussion it would be a bad start for
>>> the project.
>> You're misportraying the facts; it's a preexisting Apache policy that
>> predates OOo being proposed as a podling.
>> Now, we're generally reasonable people here, and the podling can always
>> request an exception (talk to trademarks@).  But, with my Member hat on,
>> this collective "Let's join Apache, but not be called Apache, and not
>> work with existing Apache entities" spirit leaves a rather bad taste.
> Ah Daniel, many of these folks didn't "ask" to join Apache.  This is a
> situation that has been rare at Apache until now (modulo Apache Subversion).
> Normally a project is obscure when it starts at Apache and the only job is
> to find a name nobody has used before. is a very valuable
> brand worldwide...possibly equal to Apache in value.  As a Member (and
> Mentor of this project) I think the right thing to do is to use the Apache
> prefix along with the (regrettable but established) .org suffix. I do think
> ASF should ask trademark law counsel whether doing so would be considered
> dilution of the brand, however.

+1. Please!

Best Regards,
View raw message