Hi Shane,
On 29.08.2011 08:16, Shane Curcuru wrote:
(Apologies; I've been planning a funeral and then fleeing a hurricane.
Note that this thread spans both private and public lists)
My sincere condolence.
In general I first refer people to our policies or any published FAQs,
and I believe this one should cover the case and make everyone happy:
http://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/faq/#booktitle
I was already assuming that my proposal is to a large extend of formal
nature.
Note that while we certainly take input from (P)PMCs very strongly,
official permissions for trademark use should only be granted by
officers of the ASF - typically myself, or in specific and documented
kinds of cases, the VP of a relevant TLP project.
OK, I see.
[...]
I'm happy to take the PPMC's suggestion about asking for the title to be
"Apache ..." or just "..."; since it's about a specific product version,
it should use the name of the product version it's about.
The product is indeed called OpenOffice.org and licensed under LGPLv3,
hence "Apache ..." seems to be wrong to me.
NOTE! Any attributions the publisher provides should be to The Apache
Software Foundation, and not to Oracle. If the publisher wants to add a
note in the preface or some similar place that mentions the fact that
OpenOffice.org has moved to the ASF, that'd be great as well. 8-)
OK, thanks for the hint.
One final question, what should I do now? Resubmit my proposal to
[email protected]? It's already on CC. Or, will you post your
decision in reply to this thread after we have some more feedback?
Best regards,
Peter
- Shane
On 8/28/2011 2:40 PM, 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.]
-----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
