<div></div><div>That was someone’s opinion on a list. That is not
official.
<br/>
<br/>Sent from my iPhone
<br/>
<br/>> On May 6, 2022, at 12:14 PM, me <m...@emangini.com> wrote:
<br/>>
<br/>> Our legal folks have responded (quickly!).
<br/>>
<br/>> I’m quoting the recommendation here:
<br/>>
<br/>> If someone wants to take ASF to court over this, we can
<br/>> worry about it, then. Until then, there isn't really anything we can
do
<br/>> about it other than try to be as benign as possible toward those
people
<br/>> who might consider such litigation.
<br/>>
<br/>>
<br/>> Benign as possible can be read in a number of different ways,
depending on how we are defining the scope (federally recognized Apache
nations, all Apache nations, all indigenous tribes, etc.)
<br/>>
<br/>>
<br/>>
<br/>> 1.) (Extreme 1) Do nothing. Without a registered complaint from the
tribe, this is analogous to an “If it ain’t broke don’t fix
it, approach”.
<br/>>
<br/>> PRO: We don’t bring attention to a problem by communicating a
scenario
<br/>>
<br/>> CON: There has been communicated social impact complaints that
aren’t being addressed. There is a latent risk.
<br/>>
<br/>>
<br/>>
<br/>> 2.) (Extreme 2) Do everything. Just change the name and the license
proactively. This is a “full speed ahead” proactive effort.
<br/>>
<br/>> PRO: This removes any and all risk in perpetuity
<br/>>
<br/>> CON: The level of effort is substantial, and it may exceed social
responsibility.
<br/>>
<br/>>
<br/>>
<br/>> 3.) Middle ground. Not sure what that is.
<br/>>
<br/>>
<br/>>
<br/>> Cheers!
<br/>>
<br/>> Ed
<br/>>
<br/>>
<br/>>
<br/>>
<br/>>
<br/>>
<br/>>
<br/>>
<br/>>
<br/>>
<br/>> From: Owen Rubel <oru...@gmail.com>
<br/>> Reply: dev@community.apache.org <dev@community.apache.org>
<br/>> Date: May 6, 2022 at 12:24:54
<br/>> To: dev@community.apache.org <dev@community.apache.org>
<br/>> Subject: Re: Naming/Branding: First Steps
<br/>>
<br/>> Bravo. Brilliant.
<br/>>
<br/>>
<br/>> Owen Rubel
<br/>> oru...@gmail.com
<br/>>
<br/>>
<br/>>> On Fri, May 6, 2022 at 7:26 AM me <m...@emangini.com>
wrote:
<br/>>>
<br/>>> Happy Friday/Saturday esteemed colleagues and collaborators!
<br/>>>
<br/>>> I kicked off the first steps by reaching out to the legal team to
<br/>>> understand the risk/worst case scenario. I’m attempting to
gain a better
<br/>>> understanding to the question: “What if the choice is taken
away from us,
<br/>>> through litigation?”
<br/>>>
<br/>>> My thought process is the following:
<br/>>>
<br/>>> Irrespective of social climate, level of effort, etc. there is a
worst
<br/>>> case scenario represented by the ever present risk. Before we
embark on any
<br/>>> journeys of epic proportions for the greater good, it’s
helpful to define
<br/>>> the stakes and understand our primary responsibilities: our
community.
<br/>>>
<br/>>> I think it’s a fair assumption that this will help level
set conversations
<br/>>> going forward, as well as to provide us a next question:
“Given the defined
<br/>>> risk, what is its magnitude?” (i.e. is it a 1 in a billion
lightning
<br/>>> strike, or a 50/50 coin flip).
<br/>>>
<br/>>> —
<br/>>>
<br/>>> That said, I think there is a derivative of Owen’s
statements we have to
<br/>>> consider.
<br/>>>
<br/>>> Asking a question to parties who haven't considered that question
<br/>>> inevitably runs the risk of changing their perspective. If there
is a gun
<br/>>> to be jumped, this is most likely it. If I can make a request of
those
<br/>>> involved thus far, can you sleep on this and think about it? I
think it’s
<br/>>> something we need to consider internally so that any outreach is
approached
<br/>>> with care.
<br/>>>
<br/>>> It might be worth doing some internal research on Apache culture
(nothing
<br/>>> exhaustive, but enough for us to understand tribal values) before
<br/>>> performing outreach (or in the extreme, from performing it
altogether). At
<br/>>> the very least this can help us navigate away from areas that may
induce
<br/>>> conflict, as well as to consider the wording of our inquiry.
<br/>>>
<br/>>> Walter, you seem to have a decent hold on the social impact. Do
you have a
<br/>>> resource you can reach out to? (Or is it something you’re
willing to
<br/>>> research to compile some facts?)
<br/>>>
<br/>>>
<br/>>>
<br/>>> From: me <m...@emangini.com>
<br/>>> Reply: me <m...@emangini.com>
<br/>>> Date: May 5, 2022 at 12:57:25
<br/>>> To: dev@community.apache.org <dev@community.apache.org>,
Owen Rubel <
<br/>>> oru...@gmail.com>
<br/>>> Subject: Re: A way to keep the name
<br/>>>
<br/>>> Owen,
<br/>>>
<br/>>> You’re conflating different aspects of the circumstances.
<br/>>> (Are you not from the US? Sorry for my ignorance. I’m just
trying to
<br/>>> better understand your position.)
<br/>>>
<br/>>> 1.) Business Risk.
<br/>>>
<br/>>> Our brand name has a causal relationship with an indigenous
people.
<br/>>> Regardless of our reputation or status, that indigenous people
has the
<br/>>> claim to the naming and branding based on existing legal
precedent in the
<br/>>> United States. This presents a business risk to the foundation
and license.
<br/>>> It would be in the best interest of the foundation to evaluate
that risk.
<br/>>>
<br/>>> This problem exists whether it is dormant or active. I’m
going to hand
<br/>>> wave for brevity, but I’m happy to take this offline to
explain it further.
<br/>>>
<br/>>> Yes, the ASF is a business. It may be a Non-Profit, Open Source
Business,
<br/>>> but we create products that are consumed.
<br/>>>
<br/>>> Profit and intent are irrelevant. There is no barrier (legally,
socially
<br/>>> or in business) that makes these concepts a means for separation
or
<br/>>> dismissal of complaints should they arise.
<br/>>>
<br/>>> 2.) Social Impact.
<br/>>>
<br/>>> There have been several attempts to try to use the non-profit
structure to
<br/>>> differentiate the ASF from sports teams. The example of sports
teams is to
<br/>>> demonstrate social climate and its impact on businesses.
<br/>>> (NOTE: Jeep proactively engaged with the Cherokee nation, based
on the
<br/>>> articles previously shared. There was no complaint.) Their effort
was
<br/>>> derived from recognizing current social climate.
<br/>>>
<br/>>> Tying this back to business… being proactive is a due
diligence factor:
<br/>>> “What is the risk of continuing to perform action X?”
<br/>>>
<br/>>> Again. Profit and intent are irrelevant. There is no barrier
(legally,
<br/>>> socially or in business) that makes these concepts a means for
separation
<br/>>> or dismissal of complaints should they arise.
<br/>>>
<br/>>> —
<br/>>>
<br/>>> To your point about jumping the gun:
<br/>>>
<br/>>> Maybe? This thread started with Walter’s sentiments. Those
are derived
<br/>>> categorically from social impact/climate. Walter suggested that
there had
<br/>>> been inquiries, I believe? For a moment, let’s say that
there isn’t. Does
<br/>>> that matter?
<br/>>>
<br/>>> Social Climate is not subject to logic or math. Cherokee could
flat out
<br/>>> endorse Jeep, and Apache could sue us. (Or vice versa).
<br/>>>
<br/>>> There is a much larger issue than just a “read the room
effort” to
<br/>>> rebrand. We have a responsibility to the community as a whole to
ensure
<br/>>> that the products are safe to consume going forward in the
presence of
<br/>>> risk. Personally, this is my primary concern (and core to my
involvement.)
<br/>>>
<br/>>>
<br/>>>
<br/>>>
<br/>>>
<br/>>>
<br/>>>
<br/>>>
<br/>>>
<br/>>> From: Owen Rubel <oru...@gmail.com>
<br/>>> Reply: dev@community.apache.org <dev@community.apache.org>
<br/>>> Date: May 5, 2022 at 12:11:21
<br/>>> To: dev@community.apache.org <dev@community.apache.org>
<br/>>> Subject: Re: A way to keep the name
<br/>>>
<br/>>> This issue still is that we are jumping the gun.
<br/>>>
<br/>>> Has any REPRESENTATIVE from the Apache Nation filed a complaint
or
<br/>>> reached
<br/>>> out?
<br/>>>
<br/>>> You may be creating a problem that does not exist. If we are
doing good
<br/>>> will, it may be noticed and not seen as an issue.
<br/>>>
<br/>>> Apache Foundation is a non-profit and not a baseball team that
profits
<br/>>> off
<br/>>> the Apache Nation creating offensive hand gestures, etc.
<br/>>>
<br/>>> This may be a non-issue from the start and you are creating an
issue when
<br/>>> no REPRESENTATIVE has made a statement or complained.
<br/>>>
<br/>>> Owen Rubel
<br/>>> oru...@gmail.com
<br/>>>
<br/>>>
<br/>>> On Wed, May 4, 2022 at 11:05 AM Andrew Wetmore
<cottag...@gmail.com>
<br/>>> wrote:
<br/>>>
<br/>>>> Hi, all.
<br/>>>>
<br/>>>> We have a very long thread on the possibility of changing the
name of
<br/>>> our
<br/>>>> foundation, and the complex work involved. I may have missed
it in the
<br/>>>> back-and-forth, but is there not another way forward?
<br/>>>>
<br/>>>> What if we established an offering of value to members of the
Apache
<br/>>> Nation
<br/>>>> (defined by the eight tribes) that attaches a benefit to the
existing
<br/>>>> perceived connection between our use of the word "Apache" and
theirs?
<br/>>> Such
<br/>>>> a package could start small, but grow toward something that
is much
<br/>>> more
<br/>>>> useful than the "one peppercorn per annum" which is the legal
term in
<br/>>>> England to describe a nominal rent.
<br/>>>>
<br/>>>> The package could begin with elements that we already have in
our hands
<br/>>>> made available to members of the Apache Nation:
<br/>>>>
<br/>>>> - travel assistance to attend ApacheCon
<br/>>>> - advanced access to the Google Summer of Code
<br/>>>> - assistance within our realms of expertise with technical
<br/>>> infrastructure
<br/>>>> or code-development issues the Apache Nation faces
<br/>>>>
<br/>>>> On such a basis we could solicit additional "goods" to grow
the
<br/>>> package:
<br/>>>>
<br/>>>> - a scholarship fund to enable study in software development
<br/>>>> - internships with corporations that are ASF sponsors
<br/>>>>
<br/>>>> Others among you will have much better ideas than those I
have just
<br/>>> tossed
<br/>>>> into the ring. Please suggest them.
<br/>>>>
<br/>>>> This approach makes a positive out of what some perceive as a
negative,
<br/>>> as
<br/>>>> we grow a coincidental relationship into one of real value to
the people
<br/>>> of
<br/>>>> the Apache Nation.
<br/>>>>
<br/>>>> a
<br/>>>> --
<br/>>>> Andrew Wetmore
<br/>>>>
<br/>>>> Editor, Moose House Publications
<https://moosehousepress.com/>
<br/>>>> Editor-Writer, The Apache Software Foundation
<https://apache.org/>
<br/>>>>
<br/>>>
<br/>
<br/>
<br/>---------------------------------------------------------------------
<br/>To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@community.apache.org
<br/>For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@community.apache.org
<br/>
<br/></div>
