You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@openoffice.apache.org by Louis Suárez-Potts <lo...@apache.org> on 2011/11/10 20:48:00 UTC
OOo Business...
I continue (naturally) to receive many requests from businesses (small
and large) to use the trademarked "OpenOffice.org" logo. I generally
pass on these, as there seemed, until very recently, a mystery on how
to proceed. I'm still in need of enlightenment, and would appreciate
some guidance.
* I think it's pointless to endorse "OpenOffice.org" at this point.
The probable name of its successor will be "Apache OpenOffice" or some
variant thereof. And that new name will come into play very soon
indeed. We will need to progressively inform all those using the old
logo/name/trademark to switch over with new installation sets.
* I would therefore like to be able to respond to those requesting use
of the trademark, etc., to wait a little bit, and then to return to
us—preferably to a wiki or even better, an automated service, such as
we used on OOo, for this. (The automated service allowed us to docket
requests and act more expeditiously, while also giving room for more
fully understanding the request. Otherwise, the requests were simply
sent to a list I set up for this and which John, Florian, and I
managed for several years, though it really seems like an eternity—and
John was doing much of the work.)
—
I also receive many (well, a few) requests and inquiries about
contributing to OpenOffice.org code. (Rob has been included in one
such.) Right now, it's a little easier to tell people what to do—join
Apache's lists for OOo in the Incubator, participate, contribute. But
not all requests are quite so simple. For instance, what about
templates? Extensions? I have no problem with telling people to join
the lists where the contributions are, and to proceed according to the
Apache way (tao of apache?) but perhaps there are other answers I
should give? (Oh, and I have no problem whatsoever with others taking
on this role. I've just been doing it as an extension of my previous
existence modulo OOo, not as an assertion of nonexistent authority.)
Thanks
louis
Re: OOo Business...
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 2:48 PM, Louis Suárez-Potts <lo...@apache.org> wrote:
> I continue (naturally) to receive many requests from businesses (small
> and large) to use the trademarked "OpenOffice.org" logo. I generally
> pass on these, as there seemed, until very recently, a mystery on how
> to proceed. I'm still in need of enlightenment, and would appreciate
> some guidance.
>
Apache controls that trademark now, so only Apache can give permission
to use it.
We've received such requests as well, two of them so far, on this very
list. We have a process we take these requests through. In both
cases the requests were granted.
I'd recommend something like this:
1) Have the person who wants to use the trademark check this page and
make sure they really need permission. In some cases ("nominative
use") no permission is required.
http://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/
2) If they actually do require permission, then they should send the
request to this ooo-dev list. If there was something especially
sensitive (unannounced product plans or similar), they could send the
request to ooo-private, We would discuss and decide if we (the PPMC)
supported the request or not.
3) If we supported the request, then we would send our recommendation
to the Apache VP of Branding, who makes the final decision.
(We should really write up this procedure)
> * I think it's pointless to endorse "OpenOffice.org" at this point.
> The probable name of its successor will be "Apache OpenOffice" or some
> variant thereof. And that new name will come into play very soon
> indeed. We will need to progressively inform all those using the old
> logo/name/trademark to switch over with new installation sets.
>
There will be a transition period. So if someone is doing something
with OOo 3.3 in the immediate future, a book a video or whatever, then
they may want to get permission.
> * I would therefore like to be able to respond to those requesting use
> of the trademark, etc., to wait a little bit, and then to return to
> us—preferably to a wiki or even better, an automated service, such as
> we used on OOo, for this. (The automated service allowed us to docket
> requests and act more expeditiously, while also giving room for more
> fully understanding the request. Otherwise, the requests were simply
> sent to a list I set up for this and which John, Florian, and I
> managed for several years, though it really seems like an eternity—and
> John was doing much of the work.)
>
Right now the volume has been thin enough that ooo-dev was fine. In
fact, the volume of other stuff on ooo-dev is probably more
overwhelming to the person requesting permission.
> —
>
> I also receive many (well, a few) requests and inquiries about
> contributing to OpenOffice.org code. (Rob has been included in one
> such.) Right now, it's a little easier to tell people what to do—join
> Apache's lists for OOo in the Incubator, participate, contribute. But
> not all requests are quite so simple. For instance, what about
> templates? Extensions? I have no problem with telling people to join
> the lists where the contributions are, and to proceed according to the
> Apache way (tao of apache?) but perhaps there are other answers I
> should give? (Oh, and I have no problem whatsoever with others taking
> on this role. I've just been doing it as an extension of my previous
> existence modulo OOo, not as an assertion of nonexistent authority.)
>
I usually point people to ooo-dev, but first I point them to podling
website for background info, explain the roles at Apache, etc.
Extensions are an in-between thing. Do we want to support extension
authors on ooo-dev or ooo-users? They are really a type of user,
using the extensibility features of OpenOffice.
-Rob
> Thanks
> louis
>
Re: OOo Business...
Posted by Shane Curcuru <as...@shanecurcuru.org>.
Thanks Dave for including the links to some of the existing
trademark-related pages.
There are a few high level points about branding at the ASF that are
useful to have a better understanding of, very briefly:
- The ASF holds all trademarks on behalf of, and for the benefit of,
each of it's projects. This ensures that users can be assured in the
long term that our brands will be managed fairly and evenly.
- One of my goals with trademark policy is to move to a state where many
of the common requests are covered by existing FAQ entries. So I'm
hoping - over time, and as we codify more specific policy decisions for
ways of using Apache brands that we're happy with.
A key point is that as an all volunteer organization, we need to try to
provide as many answers in existing FAQs to let third parties find many
answers themselves, or to allow us to simply respond to queries the the
URL to a FAQ that addresses their issue. In my experience on other
projects, most requesters that have a FAQ entries, the requester is
happy to simply get the link to the FAQ without having the community to
vote and go through the whole process.
- Third parties with trademark requests need to be provided both a
public and a private way to make requests. We should certainly
encourage people to submit questions on public lists; this helps the
whole community. But in some cases, a third party may have a new idea
or project that they want to keep confidential; in those cases we need
to respect the privacy of their request if needed (i.e., sometimes we
should allow them to ask on ooo-private@).
----
I agree some key migration issues that the PPMC needs to address include:
- Better explaining to users and third parties how we expect people to
use our brands - which in the near future will include two brands; the
existing openoffice.org mark, and the to-be-decided mark like Apache
OpenOffice for the project going forward.
- Figuring out a specific workflow for third parties to 1) check the
FAQ, or other areas that may answer their question directly, or 2) a
place to make a specific permission request.
- Shane Curcuru
VP, Brand Management
The Apache Software Foundation
P.S. Useful Trademark related documents at the ASF:
Formal policy:
http://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/
What PMCs are required to do on their sites:
http://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/pmcs.html
What PMC members are expected to be responsible for:
http://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/responsibility.html
A basic step-by-step How To for PMCs who want to address potential
infringements:
http://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/reporting.html
Some key FAQ's (I want to expand this!) about specific trademark issues:
http://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/faq
A listing (partial!) of Apache marks:
http://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/list
(This definitely needs updating, especially to reflect which ones are
registered marks in various jurisdictions).
Rationale section of the Domain Name policy, which I think is one of the
best places (so far) that I've written that explains the *why* of hour
our Apache brand policies are they way they are:
http://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/domains.html#rationale
The Incubator's existing Podling branding requirements (should be
updated to better explain and match the PMC requirements someday)
http://incubator.apache.org/guides/branding.html
Re: OOo Business...
Posted by Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net>.
On Nov 10, 2011, at 12:34 PM, Louis Suárez-Potts wrote:
> Thanks, Rob, Dave. I would suggest that when queries come to us we a)
> point them to a flux page (a wiki, say) and ultimately to the
> lists/persons Dave mentions. The emphasis must be on the new context:
> Apache. As OOo gets rather a lot of these, I'd further suggest we
> consider doing what we did at OOo, and pretty much automate the
> *request* process, if not the *granting* one. (Example of request: I
> want to promote OpenOffice.org and put the logo on my site. Can I? or,
> I want to issue CDROMs and charge for media and labour and use the
> logo and trademark: Can I? Both these queries can be answered with
> boilerplate.)
There is a faq for the Apache guidelines [1]. It is a subpage.
Certainly go ahead and start a page in the Project Planning Wiki. [2]
I do think that the page will need to be on the podling website in markdown with mailto and subject links.
Regards,
Dave
[1] http://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/faq/
[2] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Project+Planning
>
>
>
> On 10 November 2011 15:02, Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>
>> On Nov 10, 2011, at 11:48 AM, Louis Suárez-Potts wrote:
>>
>>> I continue (naturally) to receive many requests from businesses (small
>>> and large) to use the trademarked "OpenOffice.org" logo. I generally
>>> pass on these, as there seemed, until very recently, a mystery on how
>>> to proceed. I'm still in need of enlightenment, and would appreciate
>>> some guidance.
>>>
>>> * I think it's pointless to endorse "OpenOffice.org" at this point.
>>> The probable name of its successor will be "Apache OpenOffice" or some
>>> variant thereof. And that new name will come into play very soon
>>> indeed. We will need to progressively inform all those using the old
>>> logo/name/trademark to switch over with new installation sets.
>>
>> It is not pointless. We plan to keep this registered trademark and domain regardless of the product name.
>
> We *want* to have both OpenOffice.org and Apache OpenOffice (if that's
> what comes down)? That seems a little confusing, don't you think?
>
> Or do you mean to say, "We want to advocate and promote the use of
> "Apache OpenOffice" or whatever, while also silently holding on to the
> legacy name and trademark"?
>
>
>>
>>>
>>> * I would therefore like to be able to respond to those requesting use
>>> of the trademark, etc., to wait a little bit, and then to return to
>>> us—preferably to a wiki or even better, an automated service, such as
>>> we used on OOo, for this. (The automated service allowed us to docket
>>> requests and act more expeditiously, while also giving room for more
>>> fully understanding the request. Otherwise, the requests were simply
>>> sent to a list I set up for this and which John, Florian, and I
>>> managed for several years, though it really seems like an eternity—and
>>> John was doing much of the work.)
>>
>> I may be wrong, but trademark requests need to go to the PPMC. Since these are private matters - ooo-private@i.a.o. Requests will be evaluated and forwarded to trademarks@a.o for approval. This is the current process which we've used in one or two cases.
>>
>
> As I mentioned at the top, the sheer volume would dictate a different
> strategy. Think Mozilla popularity among endusers. And keep in mind
> that OOo differs from many Apache projects (podling or not) in wearing
> a benign user face (user friendly, like); indeed, the vast majority of
> those coming to the site were there to get the app, not to make it.
> (Sigh.) I know that will change—yay—but what won't change will be its
> relative popularity, though of course some will prefer LibreOffice.
>>>
>>> —
>>>
>>> I also receive many (well, a few) requests and inquiries about
>>> contributing to OpenOffice.org code. (Rob has been included in one
>>> such.) Right now, it's a little easier to tell people what to do—join
>>> Apache's lists for OOo in the Incubator, participate, contribute. But
>>> not all requests are quite so simple. For instance, what about
>>> templates? Extensions? I have no problem with telling people to join
>>> the lists where the contributions are, and to proceed according to the
>>> Apache way (tao of apache?) but perhaps there are other answers I
>>> should give? (Oh, and I have no problem whatsoever with others taking
>>> on this role. I've just been doing it as an extension of my previous
>>> existence modulo OOo, not as an assertion of nonexistent authority.)
>>
>> We've yet to find a volunteer to take the lead on dealing with these overloaded Drupal servers at OSUOSL.
>
> I would suggest we articulate a better version of what we had with
> OOo—more open, perhaps—and I would help in finding someone to assist
> here. The Extensions repository is of real importance, and not just
> for OOo. It's where a lot of contributors go, as OOo remains
> formidable for many, but the extensions do not.
>
> The people who made Extensions so good are mostly here, on the Apache
> lists: Juergen, for one, did a lot of great work.
>
> So: I suggest we need to clarify, using a wiki, the trademark policy
> *at present* and as it may evolve.
>
> Rob's suggestion,
>
> quote
>
> I'd recommend something like this:
>
> 1) Have the person who wants to use the trademark check this page and
> make sure they really need permission. In some cases ("nominative
> use") no permission is required.
>
> http://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/
>
>
> 2) If they actually do require permission, then they should send the
> request to this ooo-dev list. If there was something especially
> sensitive (unannounced product plans or similar), they could send the
> request to ooo-private, We would discuss and decide if we (the PPMC)
> supported the request or not.
>
> 3) If we supported the request, then we would send our recommendation
> to the Apache VP of Branding, who makes the final decision.
>
> (We should really write up this procedure)
>
> /quote
>
> is a start, but having lived through the email flood that comes from
> this—and having understood that asking people to subscribe for this
> sort of request is not the best remedy for a user app like OOo, I'd
> suggest something like what we had on OOo or that Mozilla uses, a
> process by which requests are automatically docketed via form filled
> out by the requester and if the nature of the request merits it, are
> individually scrutinized for approval.
>
> I further suggest that we start itemizing a list of things That Need to Be Done.
>
>>
>> Regards,
>> Dave
>>
>
>
> Cheers,
> Louis
Re: OOo Business...
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 5:17 PM, Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> On Nov 10, 2011, at 2:05 PM, Louis Suárez-Potts wrote:
>
>> Rob,
>>
>>
>> On 10 November 2011 16:09, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
>>> Could we use Bugzilla for this? Even if the interface is too geeky
>>> for the requester, any of us could quickly transcribe the request into
>>> a new issue for tracking and workflow.
>>
>> Let's follow Don's and Dave's suggestions and then go from there. But
>> to answer your query: sure…. but imagine standing under a hot shower:
>> nice. Then imagine standing under a waterfall, say the Victoria Falls.
>>
>> Not nice.
>>
>> :-)
>>
>> Anything that places a human agent, especially unpaid, in the role of
>> doing something tedious but also important like this day in and day
>> out risks too much. It is better to take our experience seriously and
>> implement, as much as possible, vetted automagical tools that
>> nevertheless allow us room to scrutinize.
>
> If this truly is a fire hose of requests then it probably needs its own list which can examined from time to time and then followed up on.
>
I'd like to see a little this rumored "fire house" before we take the
step of creating a dedicated list for it. My guess is there are few
requests that actually require permission and many others that merely
require that we point to FAQ.
ooo-marketing might be the right list to steer the requests to for
now. This would be appropriate because many of the co-marketing
opportunities, e.g., a new AOOo-derived product might be linked to on
our site, along with other derivatives. Books and other things might
also get links.
-Rob
Re: OOo Business...
Posted by Louis Suárez-Potts <ls...@gmail.com>.
hi
On 11 November 2011 05:39, Ross Gardler <rg...@opendirective.com> wrote:
> On 10 November 2011 14:53, Louis Suárez-Potts <ls...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Uhm. I think a list is good… but.
>
> ...
>
>> I can't give an accurate number right now, as the Web page is off. But
>> I'd say toward the end about 10 or so; but that was using the Web
>> interface, which evaded the spam effect.
>
> "10 or so" is not enough for a new list. We need to KISS [1]
I really would rather not have a new list but would really rather have
a web front that obviates the need of a list and which effectively (I
should think) evade spam.
>
> If someone wants to take the time to write a web interface I'm pretty
> sure we'd all be grateful, but I'm not sure I'd be willing to spend my
> time on that. Creating clearer documentation is a different issue.
\
Any chance we can port the one used by OOo? (And that q. could stand
for other useful bits.)
>
> I look forward to seeing contributions to that documentation.
>
> Ross
Cheers,
Louis
>
> [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KISS_principle
>
Re: OOo Business...
Posted by Ross Gardler <rg...@opendirective.com>.
On 10 November 2011 14:53, Louis Suárez-Potts <ls...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Uhm. I think a list is good… but.
...
> I can't give an accurate number right now, as the Web page is off. But
> I'd say toward the end about 10 or so; but that was using the Web
> interface, which evaded the spam effect.
"10 or so" is not enough for a new list. We need to KISS [1]
If someone wants to take the time to write a web interface I'm pretty
sure we'd all be grateful, but I'm not sure I'd be willing to spend my
time on that. Creating clearer documentation is a different issue.
I look forward to seeing contributions to that documentation.
Ross
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KISS_principle
Re: OOo Business...
Posted by Louis Suárez-Potts <ls...@gmail.com>.
Hi,
On 10 November 2011 17:17, Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> On Nov 10, 2011, at 2:05 PM, Louis Suárez-Potts wrote:
>
>> Rob,
>>
>>
>> On 10 November 2011 16:09, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
>>> Could we use Bugzilla for this? Even if the interface is too geeky
>>> for the requester, any of us could quickly transcribe the request into
>>> a new issue for tracking and workflow.
>>
>> Let's follow Don's and Dave's suggestions and then go from there. But
>> to answer your query: sure…. but imagine standing under a hot shower:
>> nice. Then imagine standing under a waterfall, say the Victoria Falls.
>>
>> Not nice.
>>
>> :-)
>>
>> Anything that places a human agent, especially unpaid, in the role of
>> doing something tedious but also important like this day in and day
>> out risks too much. It is better to take our experience seriously and
>> implement, as much as possible, vetted automagical tools that
>> nevertheless allow us room to scrutinize.
>
> If this truly is a fire hose of requests then it probably needs its own list which can examined from time to time and then followed up on.
Uhm. I think a list is good… but. We did that at OOo, and it worked
so-so and then not well at all. We used logos@marketing, and the idea
was to make it open to all, so that they could freely and without
logging in ask for permission (my idea to ask for permission—heretical
in an open source environment, it seemed—but also pleasing to the
corporate owners to control distribution of the trademark or at least
know of its distribution). The result was the expected: Spam Heaven or
Hell, depending.
With time, we (Stefan, mainly) erected a Web front on services,
http://surveys.services.openoffice.org/surveys/index.php?sid=31881&lang=en,
though I don't know if it's operational, still (just checked and it
seems kaput). But it was a simple survey script asking fairly
innocuous questions that can and ought to be refined to suit the
present need.
Once a requester filled out the form and submitted it, the
responsables got it. In this case that meant those employed by Sun and
then Oracle and in leadership roles. Earlier, the request list
managing was pretty much delegated entirely to the Marketing leads.
For routine requests: humans did not have to do anything. If someone
wanted to deploy the trademark and agreed to do so according to the
rules and guidelines, great. If they had a more complicated request,
such as altering the code to include their contribution (say, a
proprietary extension), then this would be treated by a registered
human (me! or a reasonable facsimile thereof).
If someone was violating our trademark—this, shockingly, happens, even
now—I would proceed by sending notices and hint at darker powers (the
Sun or Oracle legal staff), escalating as needed. Usually wasn't
needed.
And so on. The idea was to minimize the human intervention and to make
it easier to promulgate and proliferate the app. and grow the
community.
>
> The subject controls the type and some set of PPMC volunteers can be delegated to check.
>
> How many requests are received in a month?
The quantity: Much of it when we only used the logos@ list, was spam.
When we started using the Web interface, the number dropped
precipitously and it became manageable by regular humans. But once we
go public again with our new(ed) existence, I'd imagine that not only
would extant deployers want to use the new logo, but that there will
be a flood of new requests, and I think we ought to make it easier on
us all.
I can't give an accurate number right now, as the Web page is off. But
I'd say toward the end about 10 or so; but that was using the Web
interface, which evaded the spam effect.
>
> Regards,
> Dave
>
Cheers,
Louis
Re: OOo Business...
Posted by Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net>.
On Nov 10, 2011, at 2:05 PM, Louis Suárez-Potts wrote:
> Rob,
>
>
> On 10 November 2011 16:09, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
>> Could we use Bugzilla for this? Even if the interface is too geeky
>> for the requester, any of us could quickly transcribe the request into
>> a new issue for tracking and workflow.
>
> Let's follow Don's and Dave's suggestions and then go from there. But
> to answer your query: sure…. but imagine standing under a hot shower:
> nice. Then imagine standing under a waterfall, say the Victoria Falls.
>
> Not nice.
>
> :-)
>
> Anything that places a human agent, especially unpaid, in the role of
> doing something tedious but also important like this day in and day
> out risks too much. It is better to take our experience seriously and
> implement, as much as possible, vetted automagical tools that
> nevertheless allow us room to scrutinize.
If this truly is a fire hose of requests then it probably needs its own list which can examined from time to time and then followed up on.
The subject controls the type and some set of PPMC volunteers can be delegated to check.
How many requests are received in a month?
Regards,
Dave
>
> lsp
Re: OOo Business...
Posted by Louis Suárez-Potts <ls...@gmail.com>.
Rob,
On 10 November 2011 16:09, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
> Could we use Bugzilla for this? Even if the interface is too geeky
> for the requester, any of us could quickly transcribe the request into
> a new issue for tracking and workflow.
Let's follow Don's and Dave's suggestions and then go from there. But
to answer your query: sure…. but imagine standing under a hot shower:
nice. Then imagine standing under a waterfall, say the Victoria Falls.
Not nice.
:-)
Anything that places a human agent, especially unpaid, in the role of
doing something tedious but also important like this day in and day
out risks too much. It is better to take our experience seriously and
implement, as much as possible, vetted automagical tools that
nevertheless allow us room to scrutinize.
lsp
Re: OOo Business...
Posted by Donald Whytock <dw...@gmail.com>.
I'd suggest the email form, as Louis suggests, especially if said
email has to go to ooo-private, as Rob said. ("Rule one is, we don't
talk about ooo-private...") It can be at the end of, or linked to
from, a FAQ. Simple and quick for the user, and can include a subject
tag for easy identification by the list moderators.
Also transparent to users if you later decide to send said requests
to, say, ooo-marketing.
Don
Re: OOo Business...
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 3:34 PM, Louis Suárez-Potts
<ls...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Thanks, Rob, Dave. I would suggest that when queries come to us we a)
> point them to a flux page (a wiki, say) and ultimately to the
> lists/persons Dave mentions. The emphasis must be on the new context:
> Apache. As OOo gets rather a lot of these, I'd further suggest we
> consider doing what we did at OOo, and pretty much automate the
> *request* process, if not the *granting* one. (Example of request: I
> want to promote OpenOffice.org and put the logo on my site. Can I? or,
> I want to issue CDROMs and charge for media and labour and use the
> logo and trademark: Can I? Both these queries can be answered with
> boilerplate.)
>
Could we use Bugzilla for this? Even if the interface is too geeky
for the requester, any of us could quickly transcribe the request into
a new issue for tracking and workflow.
-Rob
Re: OOo Business...
Posted by Louis Suárez-Potts <ls...@gmail.com>.
Thanks, Rob, Dave. I would suggest that when queries come to us we a)
point them to a flux page (a wiki, say) and ultimately to the
lists/persons Dave mentions. The emphasis must be on the new context:
Apache. As OOo gets rather a lot of these, I'd further suggest we
consider doing what we did at OOo, and pretty much automate the
*request* process, if not the *granting* one. (Example of request: I
want to promote OpenOffice.org and put the logo on my site. Can I? or,
I want to issue CDROMs and charge for media and labour and use the
logo and trademark: Can I? Both these queries can be answered with
boilerplate.)
On 10 November 2011 15:02, Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> On Nov 10, 2011, at 11:48 AM, Louis Suárez-Potts wrote:
>
>> I continue (naturally) to receive many requests from businesses (small
>> and large) to use the trademarked "OpenOffice.org" logo. I generally
>> pass on these, as there seemed, until very recently, a mystery on how
>> to proceed. I'm still in need of enlightenment, and would appreciate
>> some guidance.
>>
>> * I think it's pointless to endorse "OpenOffice.org" at this point.
>> The probable name of its successor will be "Apache OpenOffice" or some
>> variant thereof. And that new name will come into play very soon
>> indeed. We will need to progressively inform all those using the old
>> logo/name/trademark to switch over with new installation sets.
>
> It is not pointless. We plan to keep this registered trademark and domain regardless of the product name.
We *want* to have both OpenOffice.org and Apache OpenOffice (if that's
what comes down)? That seems a little confusing, don't you think?
Or do you mean to say, "We want to advocate and promote the use of
"Apache OpenOffice" or whatever, while also silently holding on to the
legacy name and trademark"?
>
>>
>> * I would therefore like to be able to respond to those requesting use
>> of the trademark, etc., to wait a little bit, and then to return to
>> us—preferably to a wiki or even better, an automated service, such as
>> we used on OOo, for this. (The automated service allowed us to docket
>> requests and act more expeditiously, while also giving room for more
>> fully understanding the request. Otherwise, the requests were simply
>> sent to a list I set up for this and which John, Florian, and I
>> managed for several years, though it really seems like an eternity—and
>> John was doing much of the work.)
>
> I may be wrong, but trademark requests need to go to the PPMC. Since these are private matters - ooo-private@i.a.o. Requests will be evaluated and forwarded to trademarks@a.o for approval. This is the current process which we've used in one or two cases.
>
As I mentioned at the top, the sheer volume would dictate a different
strategy. Think Mozilla popularity among endusers. And keep in mind
that OOo differs from many Apache projects (podling or not) in wearing
a benign user face (user friendly, like); indeed, the vast majority of
those coming to the site were there to get the app, not to make it.
(Sigh.) I know that will change—yay—but what won't change will be its
relative popularity, though of course some will prefer LibreOffice.
>>
>> —
>>
>> I also receive many (well, a few) requests and inquiries about
>> contributing to OpenOffice.org code. (Rob has been included in one
>> such.) Right now, it's a little easier to tell people what to do—join
>> Apache's lists for OOo in the Incubator, participate, contribute. But
>> not all requests are quite so simple. For instance, what about
>> templates? Extensions? I have no problem with telling people to join
>> the lists where the contributions are, and to proceed according to the
>> Apache way (tao of apache?) but perhaps there are other answers I
>> should give? (Oh, and I have no problem whatsoever with others taking
>> on this role. I've just been doing it as an extension of my previous
>> existence modulo OOo, not as an assertion of nonexistent authority.)
>
> We've yet to find a volunteer to take the lead on dealing with these overloaded Drupal servers at OSUOSL.
I would suggest we articulate a better version of what we had with
OOo—more open, perhaps—and I would help in finding someone to assist
here. The Extensions repository is of real importance, and not just
for OOo. It's where a lot of contributors go, as OOo remains
formidable for many, but the extensions do not.
The people who made Extensions so good are mostly here, on the Apache
lists: Juergen, for one, did a lot of great work.
So: I suggest we need to clarify, using a wiki, the trademark policy
*at present* and as it may evolve.
Rob's suggestion,
quote
I'd recommend something like this:
1) Have the person who wants to use the trademark check this page and
make sure they really need permission. In some cases ("nominative
use") no permission is required.
http://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/
2) If they actually do require permission, then they should send the
request to this ooo-dev list. If there was something especially
sensitive (unannounced product plans or similar), they could send the
request to ooo-private, We would discuss and decide if we (the PPMC)
supported the request or not.
3) If we supported the request, then we would send our recommendation
to the Apache VP of Branding, who makes the final decision.
(We should really write up this procedure)
/quote
is a start, but having lived through the email flood that comes from
this—and having understood that asking people to subscribe for this
sort of request is not the best remedy for a user app like OOo, I'd
suggest something like what we had on OOo or that Mozilla uses, a
process by which requests are automatically docketed via form filled
out by the requester and if the nature of the request merits it, are
individually scrutinized for approval.
I further suggest that we start itemizing a list of things That Need to Be Done.
>
> Regards,
> Dave
>
Cheers,
Louis
Re: OOo Business...
Posted by Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net>.
On Nov 10, 2011, at 11:48 AM, Louis Suárez-Potts wrote:
> I continue (naturally) to receive many requests from businesses (small
> and large) to use the trademarked "OpenOffice.org" logo. I generally
> pass on these, as there seemed, until very recently, a mystery on how
> to proceed. I'm still in need of enlightenment, and would appreciate
> some guidance.
>
> * I think it's pointless to endorse "OpenOffice.org" at this point.
> The probable name of its successor will be "Apache OpenOffice" or some
> variant thereof. And that new name will come into play very soon
> indeed. We will need to progressively inform all those using the old
> logo/name/trademark to switch over with new installation sets.
It is not pointless. We plan to keep this registered trademark and domain regardless of the product name.
>
> * I would therefore like to be able to respond to those requesting use
> of the trademark, etc., to wait a little bit, and then to return to
> us—preferably to a wiki or even better, an automated service, such as
> we used on OOo, for this. (The automated service allowed us to docket
> requests and act more expeditiously, while also giving room for more
> fully understanding the request. Otherwise, the requests were simply
> sent to a list I set up for this and which John, Florian, and I
> managed for several years, though it really seems like an eternity—and
> John was doing much of the work.)
I may be wrong, but trademark requests need to go to the PPMC. Since these are private matters - ooo-private@i.a.o. Requests will be evaluated and forwarded to trademarks@a.o for approval. This is the current process which we've used in one or two cases.
>
> —
>
> I also receive many (well, a few) requests and inquiries about
> contributing to OpenOffice.org code. (Rob has been included in one
> such.) Right now, it's a little easier to tell people what to do—join
> Apache's lists for OOo in the Incubator, participate, contribute. But
> not all requests are quite so simple. For instance, what about
> templates? Extensions? I have no problem with telling people to join
> the lists where the contributions are, and to proceed according to the
> Apache way (tao of apache?) but perhaps there are other answers I
> should give? (Oh, and I have no problem whatsoever with others taking
> on this role. I've just been doing it as an extension of my previous
> existence modulo OOo, not as an assertion of nonexistent authority.)
We've yet to find a volunteer to take the lead on dealing with these overloaded Drupal servers at OSUOSL.
Regards,
Dave
>
> Thanks
> louis