RE: Limiting Trademark Policy Discussion (was RE: [REPORT] PMC 2015-07 Private-List ...)
I'm wondering about the following. I think the based on X conversation is already happening at a general level and I believe participation at that level is better, since this will probably be simple and generic and VP Brand Management will likely take a position that applies to us also. I thought powered by X was also being discussed at a cross-project level. I may have been mistaken. The conversations went across different lists and I lost track. I suspect VP Brand Management may set a policy there too. I think in practice there will always have to be treatment on an individual-case basis. Any cookie-cutter test would be simply a starting point for a negotiated agreement that could be rescinded if an user of the marks violates the agreed conditions. I have no prediction how that would go. Those were somewhat open discussions that arose out of what happens if someone distributes builds of unreleased code, and what about when someone other than the project distributes binaries of released code, with none to significant alternations. How can the Apache Project marks be used under those conditions? It would be good to see what conclusions have been reached, if reached yet, and rely on that broader analysis if possible. I didn't think there was any notion of required labelling so much as indicating how one of those distributions could indicate relationship in a way that did not violate trademarks. I am not certain there was anything about required based/powered but rather conditions under which those would be allowed to be used, although others, including Dave may have raised the prospect. We should look again there. What were your take-aways from those discussion, Dave? - Dennis -Original Message- From: Dave Fisher [mailto:dave2w...@comcast.net] Sent: Saturday, August 29, 2015 18:13 To: dev@openoffice.apache.org Subject: Re: Limiting Trademark Policy Discussion (was RE: [REPORT] PMC 2015-07 Private-List ...) As me from my soapbox: [ ... ] I think that the project should have an open source code test for Powered By that applies to all. The rights to use are clear for all. The obligations spelled out. Benefits given equally. [ ... ] Once we have a proposal that the community likes we can go through any type of confirmation or clearance the Brand committee requires. I expect that this discussion should proceed carefully and not rush into set form but instead collect ideas focusing on different parts. There must be an opportunity to heal rifts with respect for all. Are you open to that discussion? Are you open to any and all to that discussion? This process is not against any group, but for all. Regards, Dave [ ... ] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Limiting Trademark Policy Discussion (was RE: [REPORT] PMC 2015-07 Private-List ...)
Hi, On 29 Aug 15, at 21:13, Dave Fisher dave2w...@comcast.net wrote: As me from my soapbox: Any proposal for reworking trademark policies would naturally grandfather prior arrangements. My hope is that any rework of policies would be more and not less generous than current reality. I think that the project should have an open source code test for Powered By that applies to all. The rights to use are clear for all. The obligations spelled out. Benefits given equally. Easier said than done. I had written a longer reply on this issue but that can wait. We should (re)acknowledge what (re)based on Apache OpenOffice requires whatever that really is. Yep. Once we have a proposal that the community likes we can go through any type of confirmation or clearance the Brand committee requires. Indeed. I expect that this discussion should proceed carefully and not rush into set form but instead collect ideas focusing on different parts. There must be an opportunity to heal rifts with respect for all. Are you open to that discussion? Are you open to any and all to that discussion? This process is not against any group, but for all. yes. I need to underscore one thing I think Dave is doing here. He’s humanising the process, opening it up. Undoubtedly this will lead to some confusion but it won’t be serious and it won’t fatally commit or tarnish Apache. It will actually be good, should it occur. And it will also lead, I believe, to interested and interesting discussion, which is hugely important and whose very existence implies trust. Regards, Dave best, louis Sent from my iPhone On Aug 29, 2015, at 5:26 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton orc...@apache.org wrote: From the Chair, I don't know, off-hand, what the proportion of discussion of Trademark Policy is in the PMC private discussion activity so far this year. However, a discussion of trademark policy, as such, especially with real and fictional examples, is inappropriate on this list if it is about trademark enforcement. Trademark enforcement, when material to an issue before the PMC, is a private duty of the PMC. There are ways to reduce the discussion to essentials there, however. Let me illustrate what I mean by this. Let's say the Apache OpenOffice PMC has offered arrangements, ratified VP Brand Management, by which a third party can employ AOO marks as part of a Powered by Apache OpenOffice labeling. The PMC establishes the conditions under which that arrangement is available to individual parties and may propose custom arrangements based on the circumstances. That might be useful to describe and clarify here. On the other hand, proposal of conditions under which third parties might be *required* to enter into such an arrangement is entirely different, even hypothetically. As far as I know that is inconsistent with the ASF view of how its mission is accomplished and its being a good citizen in the world of open-source activities. The ASF is by nature not litigious and resolves concerns about inappropriate use of its marks by other means. I can't imagine it attempting to compel use of any of its marks. IMPORTANT. Trademark protection, infringement, and remedies are serious legal matters and they are not for inexpert discussion on public mailing lists. Suspicions of infringement and any acting on those suspicions in public pronouncements are unwelcome. Even disguised accounts of specific situations relevant to this project are inappropriate. And if not relevant to this project, they don't belong here either. To abbreviate the need for custom PMC discussions on cases of alleged trademark infringement, I have posted a policy applicable to how the AOO PMC shall deal with any allegations of infringement and prospective curing of such infringements at http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/pmc/Policies/Trademark-Infringement-Allegations-2015-08.txt. Questions, comments, and suggestions about that text are welcome. - Dennis BACKGROUND INFORMATION At the Apache Software Foundation, the Board delegates the determination and resolution of trademark matters to the Vice President, Brand Management. All external engagement with respect to trademarks is handled discretely within the PMC and then always reviewed by, and possibly acted upon, by VP Brand Management and only VP Brand Management. Individual projects are expected to be vigilant about how marks are used and also allowed in the domain of the project. The Apache OpenOffice PMC conducts such activities. The web site page at http://openoffice.apache.org/trademarks.html is sufficient information for those who have concerns for use of or infringing use of Apache OpenOffice marks. There are non-specific topical discussions on the use of marks and the naming of software distributions based on code from ASF projects, such as recent
Limiting Trademark Policy Discussion (was RE: [REPORT] PMC 2015-07 Private-List ...)
From the Chair, I don't know, off-hand, what the proportion of discussion of Trademark Policy is in the PMC private discussion activity so far this year. However, a discussion of trademark policy, as such, especially with real and fictional examples, is inappropriate on this list if it is about trademark enforcement. Trademark enforcement, when material to an issue before the PMC, is a private duty of the PMC. There are ways to reduce the discussion to essentials there, however. Let me illustrate what I mean by this. Let's say the Apache OpenOffice PMC has offered arrangements, ratified VP Brand Management, by which a third party can employ AOO marks as part of a Powered by Apache OpenOffice labeling. The PMC establishes the conditions under which that arrangement is available to individual parties and may propose custom arrangements based on the circumstances. That might be useful to describe and clarify here. On the other hand, proposal of conditions under which third parties might be *required* to enter into such an arrangement is entirely different, even hypothetically. As far as I know that is inconsistent with the ASF view of how its mission is accomplished and its being a good citizen in the world of open-source activities. The ASF is by nature not litigious and resolves concerns about inappropriate use of its marks by other means. I can't imagine it attempting to compel use of any of its marks. IMPORTANT. Trademark protection, infringement, and remedies are serious legal matters and they are not for inexpert discussion on public mailing lists. Suspicions of infringement and any acting on those suspicions in public pronouncements are unwelcome. Even disguised accounts of specific situations relevant to this project are inappropriate. And if not relevant to this project, they don't belong here either. To abbreviate the need for custom PMC discussions on cases of alleged trademark infringement, I have posted a policy applicable to how the AOO PMC shall deal with any allegations of infringement and prospective curing of such infringements at http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/pmc/Policies/Trademark-Infringement-Allegations-2015-08.txt. Questions, comments, and suggestions about that text are welcome. - Dennis BACKGROUND INFORMATION At the Apache Software Foundation, the Board delegates the determination and resolution of trademark matters to the Vice President, Brand Management. All external engagement with respect to trademarks is handled discretely within the PMC and then always reviewed by, and possibly acted upon, by VP Brand Management and only VP Brand Management. Individual projects are expected to be vigilant about how marks are used and also allowed in the domain of the project. The Apache OpenOffice PMC conducts such activities. The web site page at http://openoffice.apache.org/trademarks.html is sufficient information for those who have concerns for use of or infringing use of Apache OpenOffice marks. There are non-specific topical discussions on the use of marks and the naming of software distributions based on code from ASF projects, such as recent discussions on gene...@incubator.apache.org and legal-disc...@apache.org. There are some seemingly-borderline cases that the ASF may take a position on, and it might become necessary for the AOO PMC to be watchful for such cases. In general, VP Brand Management will establish what such cases are. The determination can easily be that some or all such cases are trifles in the context of the mission of the ASF and will not be pursued. The LEGAL JIRA section might also have issues related to branding issues. - Dennis -Original Message- From: Dave Fisher [mailto:dave2w...@comcast.net] Sent: Saturday, August 29, 2015 12:45 To: dev@openoffice.apache.org Subject: Re: [REPORT] PMC 2015-07 Private-List Activity through July We could reduce private traffic if we discussed the policy for trademarks in public. The community can help write a clear policy statement with real and fictional examples. This would serve the community by reducing private inquiries to unusual cases not previously considered or unclearly explained. Regards, Dave Sent from my iPhone - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Limiting Trademark Policy Discussion (was RE: [REPORT] PMC 2015-07 Private-List ...)
As me from my soapbox: Any proposal for reworking trademark policies would naturally grandfather prior arrangements. My hope is that any rework of policies would be more and not less generous than current reality. I think that the project should have an open source code test for Powered By that applies to all. The rights to use are clear for all. The obligations spelled out. Benefits given equally. We should (re)acknowledge what (re)based on Apache OpenOffice requires whatever that really is. Once we have a proposal that the community likes we can go through any type of confirmation or clearance the Brand committee requires. I expect that this discussion should proceed carefully and not rush into set form but instead collect ideas focusing on different parts. There must be an opportunity to heal rifts with respect for all. Are you open to that discussion? Are you open to any and all to that discussion? This process is not against any group, but for all. Regards, Dave Sent from my iPhone On Aug 29, 2015, at 5:26 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton orc...@apache.org wrote: From the Chair, I don't know, off-hand, what the proportion of discussion of Trademark Policy is in the PMC private discussion activity so far this year. However, a discussion of trademark policy, as such, especially with real and fictional examples, is inappropriate on this list if it is about trademark enforcement. Trademark enforcement, when material to an issue before the PMC, is a private duty of the PMC. There are ways to reduce the discussion to essentials there, however. Let me illustrate what I mean by this. Let's say the Apache OpenOffice PMC has offered arrangements, ratified VP Brand Management, by which a third party can employ AOO marks as part of a Powered by Apache OpenOffice labeling. The PMC establishes the conditions under which that arrangement is available to individual parties and may propose custom arrangements based on the circumstances. That might be useful to describe and clarify here. On the other hand, proposal of conditions under which third parties might be *required* to enter into such an arrangement is entirely different, even hypothetically. As far as I know that is inconsistent with the ASF view of how its mission is accomplished and its being a good citizen in the world of open-source activities. The ASF is by nature not litigious and resolves concerns about inappropriate use of its marks by other means. I can't imagine it attempting to compel use of any of its marks. IMPORTANT. Trademark protection, infringement, and remedies are serious legal matters and they are not for inexpert discussion on public mailing lists. Suspicions of infringement and any acting on those suspicions in public pronouncements are unwelcome. Even disguised accounts of specific situations relevant to this project are inappropriate. And if not relevant to this project, they don't belong here either. To abbreviate the need for custom PMC discussions on cases of alleged trademark infringement, I have posted a policy applicable to how the AOO PMC shall deal with any allegations of infringement and prospective curing of such infringements at http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/pmc/Policies/Trademark-Infringement-Allegations-2015-08.txt. Questions, comments, and suggestions about that text are welcome. - Dennis BACKGROUND INFORMATION At the Apache Software Foundation, the Board delegates the determination and resolution of trademark matters to the Vice President, Brand Management. All external engagement with respect to trademarks is handled discretely within the PMC and then always reviewed by, and possibly acted upon, by VP Brand Management and only VP Brand Management. Individual projects are expected to be vigilant about how marks are used and also allowed in the domain of the project. The Apache OpenOffice PMC conducts such activities. The web site page at http://openoffice.apache.org/trademarks.html is sufficient information for those who have concerns for use of or infringing use of Apache OpenOffice marks. There are non-specific topical discussions on the use of marks and the naming of software distributions based on code from ASF projects, such as recent discussions on gene...@incubator.apache.org and legal-disc...@apache.org. There are some seemingly-borderline cases that the ASF may take a position on, and it might become necessary for the AOO PMC to be watchful for such cases. In general, VP Brand Management will establish what such cases are. The determination can easily be that some or all such cases are trifles in the context of the mission of the ASF and will not be pursued. The LEGAL JIRA section might also have issues related to branding issues. - Dennis -Original Message- From: Dave Fisher [mailto:dave2w...@comcast.net] Sent: Saturday,
