On Aug 28, 2011, at 11:40 AM, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote: > Hi Peter, > > For your lazy consensus, when is the expiration at which time you propose to > act? > > Also, because this is a matter involving legalities, I'm not sure lazy > consensus works here. We need to check with the trademark-policy folks to > understand what the ceremony is. I suspect that any permission must come > from them, not one of us. But they may want the recommendation of the PPMC, > which is what the lazy consensus would then be for. > > It may be that the publisher does not require specific permission from us: > See <http://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/faq/#booktitle>. But if they do, > or if as a publisher they are wary of not having an explicit agreement, I > think it needs to come from an officer of ASF. > > Since this is our first try at this, I have copied the trademarks@ address. > > - Dennis > > HMMM... > > Also, and this is probably not the right time for this (especially for > OpenOffice.org 3.3), we might want to come up with a request (or > requirement?) that publishers include a link to locations under our support > where current information, updates, and support about OpenOffice.org can be > found. (That would be separate from links the publisher might provide for > updates on their book and on the 10,000+ templates that are provided on the > DVD.) > > We also, now that I think about it, need to provide information in our > distros and maybe for use in print, about the availability of source code for > a specific release and for information on source code for other releases, > including the latest. > > [I think I will flag these two as notes-to-self for something we need to pay > attention to. The specific source-code-availability requirement may not be > so strict under ALv2 and Apache practice, in contrast with the LGPL > requirement. It seems like a great thing to perpetuate, regardless. It is > another reason to keep the openoffice.org domain name operating because of > linking from material in print as well as on-line.]
I have added a number of the locations that show the Oracle OOo versions of these policies in our podling's port of the OOo website. Anyone should feel free to start adapting these properly. I don't have time to get deeply engrossed in these details. Regards, Dave > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Peter Junge [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Sunday, August 28, 2011 09:33 > To: [email protected] > Cc: [email protected] > Subject: [Proposal] Give the BHV publishing house in Kaarst/Germany the > permission to use the OpenOffice.org trademark and logo > > Hi, > > I would like to propose --*seeking lazy consensus*-- that the BHV > publishing GmbH, Novesiastrasse 60, D-41564 Kaarst (Germany) is > permitted to use the OpenOffice.org logo and trademark for their book > (in preparation) "OpenOffice.org 3.3 für Ein- und Umsteiger" [1] [2], > means something like "OOo 3.3 for beginners and people who are > migrating" in English. This package includes a handbook (printed and > eBook) and a DVD with the OOo binaries. The OOo logo and trademark would > be used on the book cover, within the book and on the label of the DVD. > BHV has been publishing similar books for previous versions of OOo for > many years, e.g. [3]. > > I would like to advocate granting the OOo logo usage to BHV, as such > books foster the public visibility of OOo. > > Mr. Ralf Kraft, representing BHV (nit subscribed to this ML) is on CC. > (NOTE: The mock-up of the cover is still using the old OOo logo, but I > already have been pointing out to Mr. Kraft that using the latest logo > [4] would be preferred.) > > Best regards, > Peter > > [1] http://dl.dropbox.com/u/8268859/OpenOfficeSkribble.jpg > [2] http://dl.dropbox.com/u/8268859/PI-OpenOfficeV33Pro.odt (including > ISBN code) > [3] http://www.amazon.de/dp/3826673476?m=A3JWKAKR8XB7XF&tag=idealoversand-21 > [4] http://about.openoffice.org/index.html#logo >
