Jörg Schmidt wrote:
when I say the icons are _part of the software_, I mean the physical software. This is a contrast to the name, because the name is the _name_ of the software, _not part_ of the physical software.
I'm not a lawyer, of course. But there is a difference between what the license allows to do with the code and what the trademark policy says. Or, to state it correctly: the Apache License http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0.html section 6 says that you cannot use trademarks as you wish and that you need explicit permission for certain uses. Trademarks, for OpenOffice, include the name and the gulls logo.
You can find examples of the trademark policy here: http://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/faq/#titlefeather ; so for example if someone writes a book about an Apache product he cannot include the Apache feather image in the cover. This is an extreme example; in general, one should ask for permission on a case-by-case basis. You can imagine that we will allow (and, even if not asked, tolerate) that someone uses our trademarks to support the project, while we will deny a request by someone who wants to sell for 99 EUR a thing named "Apache OpenOffice Professional" consisting in Apache OpenOffice with some malware added and wants to advertise it using the official images and make it look like as if it was a "premium" version produced by the OpenOffice project. We actively enforce trademarks in order to protect our users and the reputation of OpenOffice.
Regards, Andrea. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: marketing-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: marketing-h...@openoffice.apache.org
