Business models that will not work [was: Re: Can we update our migration status table?]

[Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>]

On Mon, Nov 28, 2011 at 11:27 AM, Marcus (OOo) <ma...@wtnet.de> wrote:
> Am 11/28/2011 05:48 AM, schrieb Dave Fisher:

<snip>

>>
>> I changed the MirrorBrain row to make it clear that this issue only
>> effects the legacy OOo downloads. All AOO releases will be on the Apache
>> Mirror system.
>>
>> Perhaps download.services.openoffice.org is one way that AOO can team up
>> with TOOo?
>
> Maybe not a bad idea. AOO will take care of the code and produces the source
> release (and maybe also some binary releases) and hosting of install files
> can be done by TOO. Could be a good thing of collaboration.
>

Anyone is free to take Apache releases and redistribute them.  Anyone.
 That is the nature of open source license.

However, there is no exclusivity to this.  We can't designate one
party, outside of Apache, as the "official" distributer of builds or
to give them special access to our download page that we do not offer
fairly to others.

So I'm afraid that business models based on things like this are doomed to fail:

1) Selling web ads based on being the exclusive or preferred download
site for OpenOffice

2) Having a 3rd party "contribute" link on a page that is the
Apache-promoted exclusive or preferred download site for OpenOffice

3) Having a special build of OpenOffice that has internal ads or links
to ads or contribute links, that is given exclusive or preferred
placement on Apache owned domains, including download.openoffice.org

4) Using names that infringe on Apache-owned trademarks in order to
confuse users and drive traffic to pages with web ads, contribute
links, or downloads with embedded ads, sponsored co-installed software
(bloatware), etc.

In other words, a business model that is based on the name recognition
and familiarity of the name "OpenOffice" rather than the goods or
services one actually produces will fail, since the above would either
violate Apache policy, the Apache-owned trademarks, or both.

Business models that might work, include:

1) Having a derivative of OpenOffice under a different name that
distinguishes itself in some way that users value, and by building a
unique brand name around these values, get traffic to your website,
where you can then sell ads, ask for contributions, etc.

2) Having an independent company that is clearly distinguished from
Apache and the AOO, that accepts donations or payment to add features
or fix bugs in AOO.  Of course, one needs to be sensitive to the fact
that you can never guarantee that a given feature will be accepted by
other committers.

3) Deployment, migration services, customization, training, extension
development for enterprise users of OpenOffice.

Perhaps there are other good business models?

-Rob

Re: What about BrOffice?

[Pedro Giffuni <pf...@apache.org>]

OK;

I have a patch that removes every occurrence of BrOffice,
and the logos.

It actually makes branding simpler but I don't
know if my patch affects the packaging.

I found a reversely related bug in bugzilla so I put
up the patch for testing at:

https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=113843

cheers,

Pedro.

Res: Re: What about BrOffice?

[Jomar Silva <ho...@gmail.com>]

Pedro,

The history told in Brazil for many users is: BrOffice changed its name to LibreOffice.

So, the damage is already done and we'll need to start almost from the scratch with Apache OpenOffice.

If we insist to use the old BrOffice brand, probably we'll just put more noise on the market.

Best,

Jomar
-----Original Message-----
From: Pedro Giffuni <pf...@apache.org>
Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2011 10:59:25 
To: <oo...@incubator.apache.org>
Reply-To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: What about BrOffice?


--- Lun 28/11/11, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> ha scritto:
..
> 
> > - Are we (AOO) allowed to carry BrOffice branding
> stuff
> > in our repository at all?
> 
> Why would we want to do that?
> 

I don't know.. you brought it in ;) :

http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/incubator/ooo/trunk/main/instsetoo_native/inc_broffice/

I do think we want to be Apache OpenOffice in Brazil too,
despite the fact OpenOffice.org was relatively unknown
there. I just wanted to be sure I can dispose of the old
BrOffice logos and stuff.

> Is there a problem with just having a Brazilian
> Portuguese release of Apache OpenOffice using the
> name "Apache OpenOffice"?  That would be the
> simplest thing to do.

We will lose many users but I think they are already
"lost" anyways.

Pedro.

Re: What about BrOffice?

["Marcus (OOo)" <ma...@wtnet.de>]

Am 11/28/2011 07:43 PM, schrieb Rob Weir:
> On Mon, Nov 28, 2011 at 1:24 PM, Pedro Giffuni<pf...@apache.org>  wrote:
>> Hi guys;
>>
>> I am not meaning to alienate the Brazilian community or
>> anything like that. Just wondering if there are thoughts
>> on BrOffice brand and releases.
>>
>> AFAICT, BrOffice is not a trademark SUN owned so it was
>> not transferred to the ASF. I think the BrOffice people
>> will have to make a proposal to the PPMC but just some
>> points to wonder about:
>>
>
> IMHO, the name "BrOffice" is different enough from "OpenOffice" that
> there is not a problem here from the AOO perspective.  But if someone
> else owns the trademark for "BrOffice" then that might be a different
> problem.
>
>> - Are we (AOO) allowed to carry BrOffice branding stuff
>> in our repository at all?
>
> Why would we want to do that?

FYI:

In the past Sun/Oracle has done special builds for the Brazilian 
community as the usual name was occupied. However, in the last builds we 
have canceled to build BrOffice install files and have done normal OOo 
builds also for the pt-BR local, too (see 
"download.openoffice.org/other.html" and 
"download.openoffice.org/all_beta.html" for reference).

However, I don't know if branding stuff (graphics, icons, etc.) is in 
the code at all but some brand names and similar things should be still 
there. So, this should be deleted now.

> Is there a problem with just having a Brazilian Portuguese release of
> Apache OpenOffice using the name "Apache OpenOffice"?  That would be
> the simplest thing to do.

Yes, "Apache OpenOffice" should be different enough.

At Sun/Oracle we had already the "problem" of difference names 
(StarOffice and StarSuite) for difference markets. Let's try this time 
to stick with a single name. :-)

Marcus

Re: What about BrOffice?

[Luiz Oliveira <lc...@gmail.com>]

Hi,

Not quite the whole story, but ultimately does not matter. So I agree with
guys who think that here in Brazil the product has the name Apache
OpenOffice.

Rgds,

Luiz Oliveira

2011/11/28 Ross Gardler <rg...@opendirective.com>

> Sent from my mobile device, please forgive errors and brevity.
> On Nov 28, 2011 6:43 PM, "Rob Weir" <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Nov 28, 2011 at 1:24 PM, Pedro Giffuni <pf...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > Hi guys;
>
> ...
>
> > >
> > > AFAICT, BrOffice is not a trademark SUN owned so it was
> > > not transferred to the ASF. I think the BrOffice people
> > > will have to make a proposal to the PPMC but just some
> > > points to wonder about:
> > >
> >
> > IMHO, the name "BrOffice" is different enough from "OpenOffice" that
> > there is not a problem here from the AOO perspective.
>
> +1
>
> Ross
>

Re: What about BrOffice?

[Ross Gardler <rg...@opendirective.com>]

Sent from my mobile device, please forgive errors and brevity.
On Nov 28, 2011 6:43 PM, "Rob Weir" <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Nov 28, 2011 at 1:24 PM, Pedro Giffuni <pf...@apache.org> wrote:
> > Hi guys;

...

> >
> > AFAICT, BrOffice is not a trademark SUN owned so it was
> > not transferred to the ASF. I think the BrOffice people
> > will have to make a proposal to the PPMC but just some
> > points to wonder about:
> >
>
> IMHO, the name "BrOffice" is different enough from "OpenOffice" that
> there is not a problem here from the AOO perspective.

+1

Ross

Re: What about BrOffice?

[Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net>]

On Nov 28, 2011, at 10:59 AM, Pedro Giffuni wrote:

> 
> --- Lun 28/11/11, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> ha scritto:
> ..
>> 
>>> - Are we (AOO) allowed to carry BrOffice branding
>> stuff
>>> in our repository at all?
>> 
>> Why would we want to do that?
>> 
> 
> I don't know.. you brought it in ;) :
> 
> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/incubator/ooo/trunk/main/instsetoo_native/inc_broffice/
> 
> I do think we want to be Apache OpenOffice in Brazil too,
> despite the fact OpenOffice.org was relatively unknown
> there. I just wanted to be sure I can dispose of the old
> BrOffice logos and stuff.

The openoffice.org N-L site for PT-BR is a simple link to broffice.org - this must change.

See - http://ooo-site.apache.org/pt-br/ and http://br-pt.openoffice.org/

If we had a PT-BR translation of the current www.openoffice.org buttons and news that would help.


> 
>> Is there a problem with just having a Brazilian
>> Portuguese release of Apache OpenOffice using the
>> name "Apache OpenOffice"?  That would be the
>> simplest thing to do.
> 
> We will lose many users but I think they are already
> "lost" anyways.

As you see the OOo site lost the users for us.

Regards,
Dave
> 
> Pedro.
> 

Re: What about BrOffice?

[Pedro Giffuni <pf...@apache.org>]

--- Lun 28/11/11, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> ha scritto:
..
> 
> > - Are we (AOO) allowed to carry BrOffice branding
> stuff
> > in our repository at all?
> 
> Why would we want to do that?
> 

I don't know.. you brought it in ;) :

http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/incubator/ooo/trunk/main/instsetoo_native/inc_broffice/

I do think we want to be Apache OpenOffice in Brazil too,
despite the fact OpenOffice.org was relatively unknown
there. I just wanted to be sure I can dispose of the old
BrOffice logos and stuff.

> Is there a problem with just having a Brazilian
> Portuguese release of Apache OpenOffice using the
> name "Apache OpenOffice"?  That would be the
> simplest thing to do.

We will lose many users but I think they are already
"lost" anyways.

Pedro.

Re: What about BrOffice?

[Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>]

On Mon, Nov 28, 2011 at 1:24 PM, Pedro Giffuni <pf...@apache.org> wrote:
> Hi guys;
>
> I am not meaning to alienate the Brazilian community or
> anything like that. Just wondering if there are thoughts
> on BrOffice brand and releases.
>
> AFAICT, BrOffice is not a trademark SUN owned so it was
> not transferred to the ASF. I think the BrOffice people
> will have to make a proposal to the PPMC but just some
> points to wonder about:
>

IMHO, the name "BrOffice" is different enough from "OpenOffice" that
there is not a problem here from the AOO perspective.  But if someone
else owns the trademark for "BrOffice" then that might be a different
problem.

> - Are we (AOO) allowed to carry BrOffice branding stuff
> in our repository at all?

Why would we want to do that?

> - Can anyone release a BrOffice branded product?

This depends on whether someone else claims a trademark on BrOffice.

> - How will it be differentiated by the BrOffice derived
> from LibreOffice (therefore under a different license)?
> - Could/should it be called Apache BrOffice? (would
> surely require permission from ASF if that's the case).
>

"Apache BrOffice" would be a problem unless BrOffice was the name of
an actual Apache project.

> Just thinking that such things should be planned
> beforehand ;).
>

Is there a problem with just having a Brazilian Portuguese release of
Apache OpenOffice using the name "Apache OpenOffice"?  That would be
the simplest thing to do.

-Rob

> cheers,
>
> Pedro.
>
>

Re: What about BrOffice?

[Simon Phipps <si...@webmink.com>]

On 28 Nov 2011, at 18:24, Pedro Giffuni wrote:

> I am not meaning to alienate the Brazilian community or
> anything like that. Just wondering if there are thoughts
> on BrOffice brand and releases.

I believe the BrOffice community joined the Document Foundation some time ago and is now fully merged; certainly http://broffice.org points clearly at LibreOffice.

S.

What about BrOffice?

[Pedro Giffuni <pf...@apache.org>]

Hi guys;

I am not meaning to alienate the Brazilian community or
anything like that. Just wondering if there are thoughts
on BrOffice brand and releases.

AFAICT, BrOffice is not a trademark SUN owned so it was
not transferred to the ASF. I think the BrOffice people
will have to make a proposal to the PPMC but just some
points to wonder about:

- Are we (AOO) allowed to carry BrOffice branding stuff
in our repository at all?
- Can anyone release a BrOffice branded product?
- How will it be differentiated by the BrOffice derived
from LibreOffice (therefore under a different license)?
- Could/should it be called Apache BrOffice? (would
surely require permission from ASF if that's the case).

Just thinking that such things should be planned
beforehand ;).

cheers,

Pedro.

Re: Business models that will not work [was: Re: Can we update our migration status table?]

["Marcus (OOo)" <ma...@wtnet.de>]

Am 11/28/2011 06:11 PM, schrieb Rob Weir:
> On Mon, Nov 28, 2011 at 11:27 AM, Marcus (OOo)<ma...@wtnet.de>  wrote:
>> Am 11/28/2011 05:48 AM, schrieb Dave Fisher:
>
> <snip>
>
>>>
>>> I changed the MirrorBrain row to make it clear that this issue only
>>> effects the legacy OOo downloads. All AOO releases will be on the Apache
>>> Mirror system.
>>>
>>> Perhaps download.services.openoffice.org is one way that AOO can team up
>>> with TOOo?
>>
>> Maybe not a bad idea. AOO will take care of the code and produces the source
>> release (and maybe also some binary releases) and hosting of install files
>> can be done by TOO. Could be a good thing of collaboration.
>
> So I'm afraid that business models based on things like this are doomed to fail:
>
> [Deleted that stuff as I wasn't talking about businesses]
>
> Business models that might work, include:
>
> 1) Having a derivative of OpenOffice under a different name that
> distinguishes itself in some way that users value, and by building a
> unique brand name around these values, get traffic to your website,
> where you can then sell ads, ask for contributions, etc.

As there will be no future release of OOo (when we skip the *maybe* 
3.3.1 release) this is no option. Of course it has to be a different name.

> 2) Having an independent company that is clearly distinguished from
> Apache and the AOO, that accepts donations or payment to add features
> or fix bugs in AOO.  Of course, one needs to be sensitive to the fact
> that you can never guarantee that a given feature will be accepted by
> other committers.

... except when doing it themselves. ;-) When there is an already 
settled committer then you can do the commits yourself. I hope that new 
(well-planned and well-structured) features will be welcome.

> 3) Deployment, migration services, customization, training, extension
> development for enterprise users of OpenOffice.

Yes, the typical options around open source software because with the 
application itself you cannot make single a penny.

> Perhaps there are other good business models?

Marcus

Re: Business models that will not work [was: Re: Can we update our migration status table?]

[Ian Lynch <ia...@gmail.com>]

On 28 November 2011 18:24, Donald Whytock <dw...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Mon, Nov 28, 2011 at 12:11 PM, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > Perhaps there are other good business models?
>
> The last stick version of Ubuntu I grabbed included LO already installed.
>
> So...bundle feature?
>

I think I have a business model that works but more for Foss in general
than specifically AOO. We have been in business a few years using it and
although hard work we are making steady progress.
-- 
Ian

Ofqual Accredited IT Qualifications (The Schools ITQ)

www.theINGOTs.org +44 (0)1827 305940

The Learning Machine Limited, Reg Office, 36 Ashby Road, Tamworth,
Staffordshire, B79 8AQ. Reg No: 05560797, Registered in England and
Wales.

Re: Business models that will not work [was: Re: Can we update our migration status table?]

[eric b <er...@free.fr>]

Hi,

Le 28 nov. 11 à 19:24, Donald Whytock a écrit :

> On Mon, Nov 28, 2011 at 12:11 PM, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>> Perhaps there are other good business models?
>
> The last stick version of Ubuntu I grabbed included LO already  
> installed.
>
> So...bundle feature?
>


On your Ubuntu, what returns :

apt-get install openoffice.org


??


Thanks
Eric Bachard


-- 
qɔᴉɹə
Projet OOo4Kids : http://wiki.ooo4kids.org/index.php/Main_Page
L'association EducOOo : http://www.educoo.org
Blog : http://eric.bachard.org/news

Re: Business models that will not work [was: Re: Can we update our migration status table?]

[Donald Whytock <dw...@gmail.com>]

On Mon, Nov 28, 2011 at 12:11 PM, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> Perhaps there are other good business models?

The last stick version of Ubuntu I grabbed included LO already installed.

So...bundle feature?

Don

RE: Business models that will not work [was: Re: Can we update our migration status table?]

[Gavin McDonald <ga...@16degrees.com.au>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Rob Weir [mailto:robweir@apache.org]
> Sent: Tuesday, 29 November 2011 10:15 PM
> To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Business models that will not work [was: Re: Can we update our
> migration status table?]
> 
> On Mon, Nov 28, 2011 at 10:09 PM, Pedro Giffuni <pf...@apache.org> wrote:
> > FWIW;
> >
> > I think a central site for hosting AOO extensions would be welcome. It
> > would be fine to have such a site sponsored by donations and web
> > publicity, and offering a share of technical support and commercial
> > extensions would be fine too.
> >
> 
> Compare, for example, Apache Maven with Sonatype's Maven Central.
> This is similar to AOO and Extensions.

I haven’t really read this thread, but I have a server here in AU if there really is
nowhere else to host this stuff. Are there any specs on what's required?

Or, shoot me if I got the wrong end of the stick.

(Happy to do the migration too if that’s needed)

Gav...

> 
> This is a good example also because it shows how to treat trademarks:
> 
> On the bottom of the page they say "Apache and Apache Maven are
> trademarks of the Apache Software Foundation. Maven Central is a service
> mark of Sonatype, Inc. Maven Central is intended to complement Apache
> Maven and should not be confused with Apache Maven. Copyright
> ©2011 Sonatype, Inc."
> 
> http://search.maven.org/
> 
> 
> > Pedro.
> >
> > --- On Mon, 11/28/11, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
> > ...
> >>
> >> Business models that might work, include:
> >>
> >> 1) Having a derivative of OpenOffice under a different name that
> >> distinguishes itself in some way that users value, and by building a
> >> unique brand name around these values, get traffic to your website,
> >> where you can then sell ads, ask for contributions, etc.
> >>
> >> 2) Having an independent company that is clearly distinguished from
> >> Apache and the AOO, that accepts donations or payment to add features
> >> or fix bugs in AOO.  Of course, one needs to be sensitive to the fact
> >> that you can never guarantee that a given feature will be accepted by
> >> other committers.
> >>
> >> 3) Deployment, migration services, customization, training, extension
> >> development for enterprise users of OpenOffice.
> >>
> >> Perhaps there are other good business models?
> >>
> >> -Rob
> >>

Re: Business models that will not work [was: Re: Can we update our migration status table?]

[Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>]

On Mon, Nov 28, 2011 at 10:09 PM, Pedro Giffuni <pf...@apache.org> wrote:
> FWIW;
>
> I think a central site for hosting AOO extensions would be
> welcome. It would be fine to have such a site sponsored
> by donations and web publicity, and offering a share of
> technical support and commercial extensions would be
> fine too.
>

Compare, for example, Apache Maven with Sonatype's Maven Central.
This is similar to AOO and Extensions.

This is a good example also because it shows how to treat trademarks:

On the bottom of the page they say "Apache and Apache Maven are
trademarks of the Apache Software Foundation. Maven Central is a
service mark of Sonatype, Inc. Maven Central is intended to complement
Apache Maven and should not be confused with Apache Maven. Copyright
©2011 Sonatype, Inc."

http://search.maven.org/


> Pedro.
>
> --- On Mon, 11/28/11, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
> ...
>>
>> Business models that might work, include:
>>
>> 1) Having a derivative of OpenOffice under a different name
>> that
>> distinguishes itself in some way that users value, and by
>> building a
>> unique brand name around these values, get traffic to your
>> website,
>> where you can then sell ads, ask for contributions, etc.
>>
>> 2) Having an independent company that is clearly
>> distinguished from
>> Apache and the AOO, that accepts donations or payment to
>> add features
>> or fix bugs in AOO.  Of course, one needs to be
>> sensitive to the fact
>> that you can never guarantee that a given feature will be
>> accepted by
>> other committers.
>>
>> 3) Deployment, migration services, customization, training,
>> extension
>> development for enterprise users of OpenOffice.
>>
>> Perhaps there are other good business models?
>>
>> -Rob
>>

Re: Business models that will not work [was: Re: Can we update our migration status table?]

[Pedro Giffuni <pf...@apache.org>]

FWIW;

I think a central site for hosting AOO extensions would be
welcome. It would be fine to have such a site sponsored
by donations and web publicity, and offering a share of
technical support and commercial extensions would be
fine too.

Pedro.

--- On Mon, 11/28/11, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
...
> 
> Business models that might work, include:
> 
> 1) Having a derivative of OpenOffice under a different name
> that
> distinguishes itself in some way that users value, and by
> building a
> unique brand name around these values, get traffic to your
> website,
> where you can then sell ads, ask for contributions, etc.
> 
> 2) Having an independent company that is clearly
> distinguished from
> Apache and the AOO, that accepts donations or payment to
> add features
> or fix bugs in AOO.  Of course, one needs to be
> sensitive to the fact
> that you can never guarantee that a given feature will be
> accepted by
> other committers.
> 
> 3) Deployment, migration services, customization, training,
> extension
> development for enterprise users of OpenOffice.
> 
> Perhaps there are other good business models?
> 
> -Rob
>