www-legal-discuss mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Shane Curcuru (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] [Commented] (LEGAL-216) Is use of the "org.apache" package in non-ASF Scala software a trademark issue?
Date Fri, 06 Feb 2015 14:00:37 GMT

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-216?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14309155#comment-14309155
] 

Shane Curcuru commented on LEGAL-216:
-------------------------------------

It is not an appropriate software development process for a third party to use org.apache.*
package names for their own newly developed software.  We can certainly ask them to change
their package names to prevent future confusion about where the classes were developed.

Even if they have plans to submit to the Incubator, they shouldn't be using our package names
now for any significant software development.  (If it's just a small class being used as a
shim or the like, it's much less important; what it does matters).

Note that this is not necessarily a legal or trademark issue: we may not have specific legal
standing to force a change.  However it is a very widely understood software development practice
(i.e. only using your own package name roots), so we can certainly ask them to change.

Unless we have some evidence that users are being confused by this software, this is not otherwise
a LEGAL issue that requires official and I recommend closing this.  But it would be good to
contact them, and forward any responses to legal-internal@ and/or trademarks@.

> Is use of the "org.apache" package in non-ASF Scala software a trademark issue?
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: LEGAL-216
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-216
>             Project: Legal Discuss
>          Issue Type: Question
>            Reporter: Andrew Purtell
>
> I've never seen software originating from other than the ASF distribute Scala based software
with "org.apache" package prefixes before, but recently looked inside Gearpump (https://github.com/intel-hadoop/gearpump)
and found this practice to my surprise. Since this is a GitHub hosted project with an active
issue tracker, I was thinking of filing an issue asking for a substitution of e.g. "com.intel"
for "org.apache" but thought I would ask here first if the Foundation sees this as an issue.
Some Googling didn't turn up a precise answer to this question. The closest I found is the
section on domain names in http://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/, which states:
> {quote}
> You may not use ASF trademarks such as "Apache" or "ApacheFoo" or "Foo" in your own domain
names if that use would be likely to confuse a relevant consumer about the source of software
or services provided through your website, without written approval of the VP, Apache Brand
Management or designee. You should apply the "likelihood of confusion" test described above,
and please realize that the use of ASF trademarks in your domain names is generally not "nominative
fair use."
> {quote}
> In this case I think there would be confusion as to the source of this software. I'm
not able to find a clear indication of the organization of origin in any bundled file, the
layout, LICENSE file, and file copyright headers look much like Apache released software.




--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org


Mime
View raw message