You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@training.apache.org by Lars Francke <la...@gmail.com> on 2019/03/11 13:29:51 UTC
Re: Legal / Trademark
Yes, I believe tests are a good thing but worth a separate thread.
I'm interested in a point Justin mentioned: The ALv2 was created with
software in mind. When we create "content" though, will that work equally
well?
Textual content as well as graphics, sounds etc.
I'm not knowledgable enough in legal to talk about this.
Any idea if we need to think about anything here? Does it make sense to
reach out to legal@ for this?
Cheers,
Lars
On Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 10:01 PM Sharan Foga <sh...@apache.org> wrote:
> Hi Craig
>
> We are on the same page. I mentioned testing and getting feedback from
> attendees in one of the other threads
>
> https://s.apache.org/7FoV
>
> I agree about starting separate discussion threads as ideas and feedback
> might get lost here.
>
> Thanks
> Sharan
>
> On 2019/02/26 17:14:12, Craig Russell <ap...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Maybe it's worth a separate thread but I think that student/audience
> feedback is an important part of training and the project should seriously
> consider some formal feedback mechanism.
> >
> > For presenter purposes, I would like to have us generate general and
> specific feedback.
> >
> > General: how did you like the presentation? How were the presenter's
> skills? Did you get what you expected from the presentation?
> >
> > Specific: Do you have a good understanding of how the Apache Incubator
> works?
> >
> > Then there are topic-specific quizzes/tests. These probably should be
> true/false and a/b/c/d questions/answers that could be printed with OCR
> circles; and given as online using web technology. The quizzes might be for
> the audience to check their own understanding, and might be for the
> presenter to check their presentation skills in conveying the information.
> >
> > The tests might also be useful for BigCo to use in a certification
> examination. BigCo could use the tests to evaluate students' understanding
> of the material and if the student has a satisfactory score can earn "BigCo
> Certification of Achievement for Apache Karaf". The exact phrasing of the
> certification needs to be vetted with Apache Trademark/Brand but should be
> similar to "BigCo distribution of Apache Karaf".
> >
> > Craig
> >
> > > On Feb 25, 2019, at 11:17 PM, Lars Francke <la...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > that helps. I assumed as much (hence we put it in the Proposal) but as
> you
> > > can see it's already been brought up again on the mailing list so I
> think
> > > it's worth it to get a link to a thread with the current stance and
> put it
> > > in a FAQ.
> > >
> > > Cheers,
> > > Lars
> > >
> > > On Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 7:30 AM Craig Russell <apache.clr@gmail.com
> <ma...@gmail.com>> wrote:
> > >
> > >> Hi Lars,
> > >>
> > >>> On Feb 23, 2019, at 4:17 PM, Lars Francke <la...@gmail.com>
> > >> wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> I believe it'd be good to talk with Legal and/or Trademark early
> on to
> > >>>> get
> > >>>>> an opinion on a few things and then later put a prominent note on
> that
> > >> on
> > >>>>> our website.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> It reasonably straight forward I think, as long as 3rd parties
> respect
> > >> the
> > >>>> Apache license, brand and it’s trademarks all is good. For instance
> [2]
> > >>>>
> > >>>> There may need to be a discussion around how do we license non code
> > >> stuff
> > >>>> as the ALv2 was only written with software in mind. We also need to
> take
> > >>>> care including stuff that under other licenses, for instance a lot
> of
> > >>>> content is under creative common licenses and that may or may not be
> > >>>> compatible with the apache license. [1]
> > >>>>
> > >>>
> > >>> Good points. And I agree, the current rules probably cover most of it
> > >> but I
> > >>> believe it doesn't hurt to be proactive here and just talk about the
> > >> issues
> > >>> we foresee. And you raised one of them.
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>> How exactly can we do that and especially how can we market it and
> > >> refer
> > >>>> to it?
> > >>>>
> > >>>> As long as there’s no confusion with users that the compony is
> > >>>> representing the ASF or the ASF project in question, again all is
> good.
> > >> [3]
> > >>>>
> > >>>>> Someone else talked about "certifications" in the VOTE thread. I
> put
> > >> them
> > >>>>> as "out of scope" in the Proposal but that doesn't mean it can't
> > >> change.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> This has come up a couple of of time at the board level and from
> memory
> > >>>> it's been something the ASF don’t want to do, that doesn’t mean we
> > >> can’t
> > >>>> bring it up again.
> > >>>>
> > >>>
> > >>> I assumed as much, hence I left it out in the proposal but since it
> was
> > >>> raised during VOTE I assume it'll come up again. So I'd raise this as
> > >> well.
> > >>
> > >> My understanding is the same as Justin's. The board is definitely not
> > >> interested in helping companies create "certified" stamps of approval
> for
> > >> training/courses.
> > >>
> > >> That said, I do not see anything wrong with the training project
> creating
> > >> as part of its offerings things to evaluate attendees' understanding
> of the
> > >> materials. In other words, tests.
> > >>
> > >> I don't recall tests being discussed here.
> > >>
> > >> Craig
> > >>>
> > >>> I see all of his as content for a FAQ page on our website.
> > >>>
> > >>> Cheers,
> > >>> Lars
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>> Thanks,
> > >>>> Justin
> > >>>>
> > >>>> 1. https://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#cc-sa <
> > >> https://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#cc-sa <
> https://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#cc-sa>>
> > >>>> 2. https://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/#books <
> https://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/#books> <
> > >> https://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/#books <
> https://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/#books>>
> > >>>> 3. https://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/#notes <
> https://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/#notes> <
> > >> https://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/#notes <
> https://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/#notes>>
> > >> Craig L Russell
> > >> Secretary, Apache Software Foundation
> > >> clr@apache.org <ma...@apache.org> <mailto:clr@apache.org
> <ma...@apache.org>> http://db.apache.org/jdo <
> http://db.apache.org/jdo> <
> > >> http://db.apache.org/jdo <http://db.apache.org/jdo>>
> >
> > Craig L Russell
> > Secretary, Apache Software Foundation
> > clr@apache.org <ma...@apache.org> http://db.apache.org/jdo <
> http://db.apache.org/jdo>
> >
>
Re: Legal / Trademark
Posted by Lars Francke <la...@gmail.com>.
Okay, understood.
I wasn't sure whether "content only" things would be a bit different as
they might be changed in their form/embedding.
e.g. we might produce Asciidoc files but someone else might decide to take
the text and potentially a few graphics and insert them into PowerPoint.
But I guess that's all covered by the license already.
So I won't do anything here until we actually see a concrete need.
On Mon, Mar 11, 2019 at 4:30 PM Craig Russell <ap...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Lars,
>
> > On Mar 11, 2019, at 6:29 AM, Lars Francke <la...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > Yes, I believe tests are a good thing but worth a separate thread.
>
> Absolutely.
> >
> > I'm interested in a point Justin mentioned: The ALv2 was created with
> > software in mind. When we create "content" though, will that work equally
> > well?
> > Textual content as well as graphics, sounds etc.
> > I'm not knowledgable enough in legal to talk about this.
> > Any idea if we need to think about anything here? Does it make sense to
> > reach out to legal@ for this?
>
> Apache has many examples of both code and non-code. Web sites,
> documentation, presentations, test cases, examples are all covered under
> the ALv2 which is broad enough for everything that I think this project
> will create and publish.
>
> Legal typically likes to have very specific examples which I don't think
> we have quite yet.
>
> Specific to the point of tests, there could be both process (code) and
> content (text) for the tests I mentioned. Both would equally be protected
> by ALv2.
>
> Regards,
>
> Craig
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Lars
> >
> > On Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 10:01 PM Sharan Foga <sh...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> >> Hi Craig
> >>
> >> We are on the same page. I mentioned testing and getting feedback from
> >> attendees in one of the other threads
> >>
> >> https://s.apache.org/7FoV
> >>
> >> I agree about starting separate discussion threads as ideas and feedback
> >> might get lost here.
> >>
> >> Thanks
> >> Sharan
> >>
> >> On 2019/02/26 17:14:12, Craig Russell <ap...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>> Maybe it's worth a separate thread but I think that student/audience
> >> feedback is an important part of training and the project should
> seriously
> >> consider some formal feedback mechanism.
> >>>
> >>> For presenter purposes, I would like to have us generate general and
> >> specific feedback.
> >>>
> >>> General: how did you like the presentation? How were the presenter's
> >> skills? Did you get what you expected from the presentation?
> >>>
> >>> Specific: Do you have a good understanding of how the Apache Incubator
> >> works?
> >>>
> >>> Then there are topic-specific quizzes/tests. These probably should be
> >> true/false and a/b/c/d questions/answers that could be printed with OCR
> >> circles; and given as online using web technology. The quizzes might be
> for
> >> the audience to check their own understanding, and might be for the
> >> presenter to check their presentation skills in conveying the
> information.
> >>>
> >>> The tests might also be useful for BigCo to use in a certification
> >> examination. BigCo could use the tests to evaluate students'
> understanding
> >> of the material and if the student has a satisfactory score can earn
> "BigCo
> >> Certification of Achievement for Apache Karaf". The exact phrasing of
> the
> >> certification needs to be vetted with Apache Trademark/Brand but should
> be
> >> similar to "BigCo distribution of Apache Karaf".
> >>>
> >>> Craig
> >>>
> >>>> On Feb 25, 2019, at 11:17 PM, Lars Francke <la...@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> Hi,
> >>>>
> >>>> that helps. I assumed as much (hence we put it in the Proposal) but as
> >> you
> >>>> can see it's already been brought up again on the mailing list so I
> >> think
> >>>> it's worth it to get a link to a thread with the current stance and
> >> put it
> >>>> in a FAQ.
> >>>>
> >>>> Cheers,
> >>>> Lars
> >>>>
> >>>> On Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 7:30 AM Craig Russell <apache.clr@gmail.com
> >> <ma...@gmail.com>> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> Hi Lars,
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> On Feb 23, 2019, at 4:17 PM, Lars Francke <la...@gmail.com>
> >>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> I believe it'd be good to talk with Legal and/or Trademark early
> >> on to
> >>>>>>> get
> >>>>>>>> an opinion on a few things and then later put a prominent note on
> >> that
> >>>>> on
> >>>>>>>> our website.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> It reasonably straight forward I think, as long as 3rd parties
> >> respect
> >>>>> the
> >>>>>>> Apache license, brand and it’s trademarks all is good. For instance
> >> [2]
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> There may need to be a discussion around how do we license non code
> >>>>> stuff
> >>>>>>> as the ALv2 was only written with software in mind. We also need to
> >> take
> >>>>>>> care including stuff that under other licenses, for instance a lot
> >> of
> >>>>>>> content is under creative common licenses and that may or may not
> be
> >>>>>>> compatible with the apache license. [1]
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Good points. And I agree, the current rules probably cover most of
> it
> >>>>> but I
> >>>>>> believe it doesn't hurt to be proactive here and just talk about the
> >>>>> issues
> >>>>>> we foresee. And you raised one of them.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> How exactly can we do that and especially how can we market it and
> >>>>> refer
> >>>>>>> to it?
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> As long as there’s no confusion with users that the compony is
> >>>>>>> representing the ASF or the ASF project in question, again all is
> >> good.
> >>>>> [3]
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Someone else talked about "certifications" in the VOTE thread. I
> >> put
> >>>>> them
> >>>>>>>> as "out of scope" in the Proposal but that doesn't mean it can't
> >>>>> change.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> This has come up a couple of of time at the board level and from
> >> memory
> >>>>>>> it's been something the ASF don’t want to do, that doesn’t mean we
> >>>>> can’t
> >>>>>>> bring it up again.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I assumed as much, hence I left it out in the proposal but since it
> >> was
> >>>>>> raised during VOTE I assume it'll come up again. So I'd raise this
> as
> >>>>> well.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> My understanding is the same as Justin's. The board is definitely not
> >>>>> interested in helping companies create "certified" stamps of approval
> >> for
> >>>>> training/courses.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> That said, I do not see anything wrong with the training project
> >> creating
> >>>>> as part of its offerings things to evaluate attendees' understanding
> >> of the
> >>>>> materials. In other words, tests.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I don't recall tests being discussed here.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Craig
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I see all of his as content for a FAQ page on our website.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Cheers,
> >>>>>> Lars
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Thanks,
> >>>>>>> Justin
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> 1. https://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#cc-sa <
> >>>>> https://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#cc-sa <
> >> https://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#cc-sa>>
> >>>>>>> 2. https://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/#books <
> >> https://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/#books> <
> >>>>> https://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/#books <
> >> https://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/#books>>
> >>>>>>> 3. https://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/#notes <
> >> https://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/#notes> <
> >>>>> https://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/#notes <
> >> https://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/#notes>>
> >>>>> Craig L Russell
> >>>>> Secretary, Apache Software Foundation
> >>>>> clr@apache.org <ma...@apache.org> <mailto:clr@apache.org
> >> <ma...@apache.org>> http://db.apache.org/jdo <
> >> http://db.apache.org/jdo> <
> >>>>> http://db.apache.org/jdo <http://db.apache.org/jdo>>
> >>>
> >>> Craig L Russell
> >>> Secretary, Apache Software Foundation
> >>> clr@apache.org <ma...@apache.org> http://db.apache.org/jdo <
> >> http://db.apache.org/jdo>
> >>>
> >>
>
> Craig L Russell
> Secretary, Apache Software Foundation
> clr@apache.org <ma...@apache.org> http://db.apache.org/jdo <
> http://db.apache.org/jdo>
>
Re: Legal / Trademark
Posted by Craig Russell <ap...@gmail.com>.
Hi Lars,
> On Mar 11, 2019, at 6:29 AM, Lars Francke <la...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Yes, I believe tests are a good thing but worth a separate thread.
Absolutely.
>
> I'm interested in a point Justin mentioned: The ALv2 was created with
> software in mind. When we create "content" though, will that work equally
> well?
> Textual content as well as graphics, sounds etc.
> I'm not knowledgable enough in legal to talk about this.
> Any idea if we need to think about anything here? Does it make sense to
> reach out to legal@ for this?
Apache has many examples of both code and non-code. Web sites, documentation, presentations, test cases, examples are all covered under the ALv2 which is broad enough for everything that I think this project will create and publish.
Legal typically likes to have very specific examples which I don't think we have quite yet.
Specific to the point of tests, there could be both process (code) and content (text) for the tests I mentioned. Both would equally be protected by ALv2.
Regards,
Craig
>
> Cheers,
> Lars
>
> On Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 10:01 PM Sharan Foga <sh...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> Hi Craig
>>
>> We are on the same page. I mentioned testing and getting feedback from
>> attendees in one of the other threads
>>
>> https://s.apache.org/7FoV
>>
>> I agree about starting separate discussion threads as ideas and feedback
>> might get lost here.
>>
>> Thanks
>> Sharan
>>
>> On 2019/02/26 17:14:12, Craig Russell <ap...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Maybe it's worth a separate thread but I think that student/audience
>> feedback is an important part of training and the project should seriously
>> consider some formal feedback mechanism.
>>>
>>> For presenter purposes, I would like to have us generate general and
>> specific feedback.
>>>
>>> General: how did you like the presentation? How were the presenter's
>> skills? Did you get what you expected from the presentation?
>>>
>>> Specific: Do you have a good understanding of how the Apache Incubator
>> works?
>>>
>>> Then there are topic-specific quizzes/tests. These probably should be
>> true/false and a/b/c/d questions/answers that could be printed with OCR
>> circles; and given as online using web technology. The quizzes might be for
>> the audience to check their own understanding, and might be for the
>> presenter to check their presentation skills in conveying the information.
>>>
>>> The tests might also be useful for BigCo to use in a certification
>> examination. BigCo could use the tests to evaluate students' understanding
>> of the material and if the student has a satisfactory score can earn "BigCo
>> Certification of Achievement for Apache Karaf". The exact phrasing of the
>> certification needs to be vetted with Apache Trademark/Brand but should be
>> similar to "BigCo distribution of Apache Karaf".
>>>
>>> Craig
>>>
>>>> On Feb 25, 2019, at 11:17 PM, Lars Francke <la...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> that helps. I assumed as much (hence we put it in the Proposal) but as
>> you
>>>> can see it's already been brought up again on the mailing list so I
>> think
>>>> it's worth it to get a link to a thread with the current stance and
>> put it
>>>> in a FAQ.
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> Lars
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 7:30 AM Craig Russell <apache.clr@gmail.com
>> <ma...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi Lars,
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Feb 23, 2019, at 4:17 PM, Lars Francke <la...@gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I believe it'd be good to talk with Legal and/or Trademark early
>> on to
>>>>>>> get
>>>>>>>> an opinion on a few things and then later put a prominent note on
>> that
>>>>> on
>>>>>>>> our website.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It reasonably straight forward I think, as long as 3rd parties
>> respect
>>>>> the
>>>>>>> Apache license, brand and it’s trademarks all is good. For instance
>> [2]
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> There may need to be a discussion around how do we license non code
>>>>> stuff
>>>>>>> as the ALv2 was only written with software in mind. We also need to
>> take
>>>>>>> care including stuff that under other licenses, for instance a lot
>> of
>>>>>>> content is under creative common licenses and that may or may not be
>>>>>>> compatible with the apache license. [1]
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Good points. And I agree, the current rules probably cover most of it
>>>>> but I
>>>>>> believe it doesn't hurt to be proactive here and just talk about the
>>>>> issues
>>>>>> we foresee. And you raised one of them.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> How exactly can we do that and especially how can we market it and
>>>>> refer
>>>>>>> to it?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> As long as there’s no confusion with users that the compony is
>>>>>>> representing the ASF or the ASF project in question, again all is
>> good.
>>>>> [3]
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Someone else talked about "certifications" in the VOTE thread. I
>> put
>>>>> them
>>>>>>>> as "out of scope" in the Proposal but that doesn't mean it can't
>>>>> change.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> This has come up a couple of of time at the board level and from
>> memory
>>>>>>> it's been something the ASF don’t want to do, that doesn’t mean we
>>>>> can’t
>>>>>>> bring it up again.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I assumed as much, hence I left it out in the proposal but since it
>> was
>>>>>> raised during VOTE I assume it'll come up again. So I'd raise this as
>>>>> well.
>>>>>
>>>>> My understanding is the same as Justin's. The board is definitely not
>>>>> interested in helping companies create "certified" stamps of approval
>> for
>>>>> training/courses.
>>>>>
>>>>> That said, I do not see anything wrong with the training project
>> creating
>>>>> as part of its offerings things to evaluate attendees' understanding
>> of the
>>>>> materials. In other words, tests.
>>>>>
>>>>> I don't recall tests being discussed here.
>>>>>
>>>>> Craig
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I see all of his as content for a FAQ page on our website.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>> Lars
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>> Justin
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 1. https://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#cc-sa <
>>>>> https://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#cc-sa <
>> https://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#cc-sa>>
>>>>>>> 2. https://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/#books <
>> https://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/#books> <
>>>>> https://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/#books <
>> https://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/#books>>
>>>>>>> 3. https://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/#notes <
>> https://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/#notes> <
>>>>> https://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/#notes <
>> https://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/#notes>>
>>>>> Craig L Russell
>>>>> Secretary, Apache Software Foundation
>>>>> clr@apache.org <ma...@apache.org> <mailto:clr@apache.org
>> <ma...@apache.org>> http://db.apache.org/jdo <
>> http://db.apache.org/jdo> <
>>>>> http://db.apache.org/jdo <http://db.apache.org/jdo>>
>>>
>>> Craig L Russell
>>> Secretary, Apache Software Foundation
>>> clr@apache.org <ma...@apache.org> http://db.apache.org/jdo <
>> http://db.apache.org/jdo>
>>>
>>
Craig L Russell
Secretary, Apache Software Foundation
clr@apache.org <ma...@apache.org> http://db.apache.org/jdo <http://db.apache.org/jdo>