Thanks for starting some detailed conversation. A couple of meta notes:
- My objective is to minimize the number of special cases we have in our
policies. Unless there are really fundamental differences, I expect
that the ASF-wide policy [1] will cover all projects. Note: I plan on
continuing to update it, especially the FAQ page, to cover exactly these
kinds of "this specific kind of use is OK" cases.
- We should carefully consider which parts of the potential process
would happen in public vs. private.
If we end up with an Apache OOo "Contact us here to request special
permission", I think that should be done publicly, with a note to
requester that the request will be public.
However trademark enforcement - i.e. us contacting third parties who may
be improperly using our marks, or third parties reporting improper uses
of our marks - is normally done privately, at least for the first
contact to a third party. This is because we've found that many cases
are simple misunderstandings or mistakes, and they are often quickly
cleaned up once we make a polite request.
- We do not currently have a template "here's permission" email or
document, that's a longer term process we should work with the ASF Legal
Affairs Committee at legal-discuss@ to create.
- Shane
On 7/21/2011 5:23 PM, Rob Weir wrote:
OK. So let's outline a trademark policy. As a strawman I'd propose:
We add a webpage called "Trademark policy" that states states that
Apache owns the trademarked name and logo, that there are certain uses
of these trademarks that that require no permission from us, but that
we require permission for any uses beyond this.
The webpage would describes the pre-allowed uses, including at least
the "nominative fair use" and other exceptions listed in the Apache
Trademark Policy. The list of pre-approved uses might be extended for
this project, by mutual agreement of the PPMC and Apache Branding.
Permission would be granted for specific, documented uses. The
trademark page would have a form for the requester to fill out,
describing the intended trademark use. The form would also list our
conditions on trademark use, likely including that usage shall not
express endorsement by Apache, etc. The form would also state that
the permission will be revoked if the terms are violated. The form
template itself should be reviewed by Apache Branding as well as
Apache Legal Affairs. Perhaps there is a template we can borrow?
A completed& signed form would then be considered by the PPMC.
Optional [DISCUSSION] thread, followed by at least 72-hour [VOTE]. A
record of all granted and rejected permissions would be tracked by the
PPMC. Decisions would be public. But we would need a policy on
whether the request forms that are submitted are public or whether
they are stored in the PPMC's private area.
Is that generally the idea? I'd like to avoid having a process that
is unnecessarily heavyweight. But if we have historically seen abuse
of the trademark and anticipate seeing more, then we will need to take
this process seriously.
[1] http://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/
On Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 9:16 PM, Shane Curcuru<[email protected]> wrote:
Thanks for the info. Note that it would be helpful if people interested in
working with trademarks read the Apache policies, as well as our growing
list of FAQs:
http://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/
http://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/faq/
Part of my strategy is to attempt to cover as many of the basic kinds of
uses with generic documentation, and to try to limit the number of explicit
agreements or specific grants that we give to third parties.
I.e. if we can clearly state in a policy that using our marks in manner X is
generally permissible, without having to fillin a webform or email for
written permission, it makes our life much, much simpler. There are plenty
of uses of trademarks that don't require any permissions and are not
infringing - otherwise, how could I order a Coke (or a Pepsi) to drink?
For things like journalists writing an article about Apache products, or
individuals with personal blogs who just want to link to the download page
for a product - I'd like to be able to point to a policy or FAQ that notes
if they do it appropriately, no explicit permission is required.
Obviously with the userbase and reach of OpenOffice.org, we need to consider
how to manage the kinds of requests and the load of requests going forward,
now that we're becoming Apache OpenOffice.
- Shane
On 7/20/2011 9:06 PM, Peter Junge wrote:
Am 20.07.2011 03:57, schrieb Shane Curcuru:
[...]
Andrew (or whoever): how/when can we get the submissions to that webform?
http://surveys.services.openoffice.org/surveys/index.php?sid=31881
I've contacted the person who I think was responsible before.
I'm actually wondering if and how we should review those, versus simply
asking people to start contacting ooo-dev@ about requests from the
Apache side.
That might depend on the number of requests that have accumulated in
recent weeks.
In particular, with the transfer of the OOo marks, how do we (as in,
this PPMC and trademarks@) handle any permissions or licensing of
"OpenOffice.org"? Especially since that mark primarily refers to a
product that we - the ASF - do not actually distribute?
Many of these request are sent by journalists (e.g. providing OOo as
part of an open source DVD as magazine add) and authors (e.g. screen
shots for a publication). Another large group are individual open source
enthusiasts who just want to put the OOo logo on their website to link
the download page. IMHO, it would be easiest to point everyone on this
list, let them briefly summarize their concern and then giving them a
preliminary permission. Next, they can send us the results of using the
OOo logo or trademark, so we can make a final decisions while having the
real context available.
best regards,
peter
- Shane
On 7/19/2011 12:51 PM, Andrew Rist wrote:
On 7/18/2011 10:37 PM, Peter Junge wrote:
Hi,
I'm still getting requests now and again from persons who want to use
the trademark OpenOffice.org for various reasons. In former times I
have been pointing them to a web form that Oracle was providing. So,
my questions are:
- Is the OOo trademark already with Apache?
Oracle legal is currently working with ASF on the transfer.
- If yes, I recall I have to forward them to [email protected],
right?
- If not, is Oracle still taking on such requests?
All of these types of requests are on hold at Oracle. The process should
be moved over to Apache.
+ Do requesters still have to use the web form?
Or, is there any interims process?
Not at this time - and - this should make it over to the Apache side of
things in reasonably short order.
Best regards,
Peter
