Re: [marketing] "Don't Count on Oracle to Keep OpenOffice.org Alive"

[Cor Nouws]

Caio Tiago Oliveira wrote (29-08-10 18:37)

Cor Nouws, 29-08-2010 05:53:

Caio Tiago Oliveira wrote (26-08-10 17:41)


There is an issue with the JCA/SCA. Some people complained when it was
still Sun, but with Oracle it's worse.


Can you pls. tell why it's worse? It is something I missed.


Sun opened Solaris development, Oracle is closing the development.
They will develop parts of it on a closed basis, only integrating the
code some time after selling binaries of Solaris.
Even delayed, they said will still contributing with CDDL, but is not
guaranteed everything will be CDDL.


I thought that you meant things with SCA changed.

Thanks anyway,
Cor

--
 >> Your office 2010 software: the new OpenOffice.org <<

Cor Nouws
  - ideas/remarks for the community council?
  - http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Community_Council


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@marketing.openoffice.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@marketing.openoffice.org

Re: [marketing] "Don't Count on Oracle to Keep OpenOffice.org Alive"

[Caio Tiago Oliveira]

Cor Nouws, 29-08-2010 05:53:

Caio Tiago Oliveira wrote (26-08-10 17:41)


There is an issue with the JCA/SCA. Some people complained when it was
still Sun, but with Oracle it's worse.


Can you pls. tell why it's worse? It is something I missed.


Sun opened Solaris development, Oracle is closing the development.
They will develop parts of it on a closed basis, only integrating the 
code some time after selling binaries of Solaris.
Even delayed, they said will still contributing with CDDL, but is not 
guaranteed everything will be CDDL.





-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@marketing.openoffice.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@marketing.openoffice.org

Re: [marketing] Printable Openoffice.org Logo templates

[Lars Nooden]

Hi, Russell,

On 08/25/2010 10:59 PM, WorldLabel.com wrote:
> Regarding the application Icon, I see one with a TM here and others without:
> http://www.openoffice.org/trademark/brandrefresh.html I am not sure but I
> think that cannot be tradmarked but would have to be registered?

Pick one that looks nice for your needs and go with it.  They are there
so that they may be used to promote (market) the OpenOffice.org package
and project.

Regards,
/Lars

FWIW:

TM is for unregistered trademarks
(R) is for registered trademarks
SM is for servicemarks)

http://www.uspto.gov/trademarks/basics/trade_defin.jsp

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@marketing.openoffice.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@marketing.openoffice.org

Re: [marketing] "Don't Count on Oracle to Keep OpenOffice.org Alive"

[Lars Nooden]

On 08/26/2010 09:44 PM, Mirek M. wrote:
> But it's a good starting point for a new branch.

No.   It's not.  The changes introduced in that one are introduced by
Microsoft affiliates with a bad history on standards and licensing.
There is a good reason it was forked.

Personally, I would like to see Oracle move to GPLv3.  For us that would
be useful, for Oracle, a few of its competitors' management teams would
blow out blood vessels.

Even without GPLv3, OpenOffice.org is LGPLv3, so it is possible (in
principle) to pick up and move on should it become necessary.  As far as
addressing the problem of software patents, v3 does that.

/Lars

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@marketing.openoffice.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@marketing.openoffice.org

[marketing] Re: survival guide

[Kálmán „KAMI” Szalai]

 Hi!

I updated the wikipage and put this line.

Who is who: Oracle Experts
 |
Community members #1

| Community members #2

| GO-OO Experts 

It is from OOoCon2008 Beijing, China. Do we have updated version?

KAMI


signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: [marketing] "Don't Count on Oracle to Keep OpenOffice.org Alive"

[Cor Nouws]

Caio Tiago Oliveira wrote (26-08-10 17:41)


There is an issue with the JCA/SCA. Some people complained when it was
still Sun, but with Oracle it's worse.


Can you pls. tell why it's worse? It is something I missed.


All code contributed to the project is shared with Oracle. Oracle owns
it and can use all the code in a closed source project.

That means Oracle can use the LPGLed code and dual licence it in a
closed way, without asking anyone.

So, if Oracle loses money, it can make something like it's doing with
OpenSolaris. It won't "kill" the project, but can invest heavily on
features only on the StarOffice side. Porting to the OOo suite
(LGPLing it) months latter or not porting some parts at all.

Who will want to contribute to someone who makes money from your work, for free?


Personally I would not mind if a companies revenues with OpenOffice.org 
come partly from my contributions. (my own 10, 100, 1000 lines versus 
the 10 mln from others that I can use...)


But that does not mean that anything that can be done with the product 
would be ok.



Even in the actual scenario, some pleople may consider contributing
code to the Oracle. Giving your code for free in such a way you can't
regret or revoke.

Just a consideration about open source licences. You can open source
it, but it still YOUR code. It never will become anyone codes. The
other people can use, alter, distribute, even they can use a
COMPATIBLE licence if you let.
The JCA/SCA means the code is not only yours, it's Oracle's code too.

The same way you can close the source of your code or dual licence
(tri-licence, et all), Oracle can do it too. It can close the source
and *sell* the closed source to third parties.

While LPGL means the LPGLed code will be free forever, they can get
the LGPLed code and not contribute with LGPL anymore (since they OWN
the code and can relicence it).
So, after that point, they can make all efforts on the closed side and
open the source if and when they want.

So... considering the contributors on code inside and outside Oracle,
what would happen to the project?

Being an open project means we should have no fear on opening it all
and investing on an OOo Foundation. Where some kind of JCA would still
be applicable, but with the owner clearly not going to close the
source.

Not leveraging on JCA/SCA with Oracle to contribute, would free the
contributors and would increase true community participation.

There is a lot of people from the community which contribute to the
project even with the JCA, but there are some people who doesn't. Also
being free from Oracle would make it easier to fix on the community
needings and that kind of "open" development would attract more
contributors.


Fixing needs is not free. So being free from XX must be compensated in 
one way or another to get the improvements you like.


Cor

--
 >> Your office 2010 software: the new OpenOffice.org <<

Cor Nouws
  - ideas/remarks for the community council?
  - http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Community_Council


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@marketing.openoffice.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@marketing.openoffice.org

Re: [marketing] "Don't Count on Oracle to Keep OpenOffice.org Alive"

[Cor Nouws]

Caio Tiago Oliveira wrote (26-08-10 22:19)


Another interesting news is that OpenSolaris won't get the code from
Oracle in real time.

As the licence allows, Oracle will release a binary with the new
development being closed and releasing the code on CDDL months latter.

That's not desired and this model is what I though Oracle could use
for OOo. Release an paid binary and releases the LGPL code months
latter.


If that happens, that would be the opposite of effectively organising 
the interest of all big players (and other contributors) that work 
on/with OpenOffice.org and in effect mean the end of the open source 
project.
But since the development and releasing of OpenOffice.org strongly leans 
on cooperation with the wider community, I have no idea how that 
scenario would look.



I agreed with Cor,  Sun spent a lot of money on OOo and other open
source projects. But be aware Sun failed to monetize. Oracle bought
Sun. Oracle changed the way they treat OpenSolaris (which won't be
named so anymore), with intention to monetize.

So... they spend a lot of money per year with OOo... how much they get
in revenue?

There is no guarantee they will never change the way they treat OOo.


Of course it is not reasonable to expect any company promising eternal 
investment in an open source project. Therefore organising the mutual 
interests is so important.


Cor

--
 >> Your office 2010 software: the new OpenOffice.org <<

Cor Nouws
  - ideas/remarks for the community council?
  - http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Community_Council


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@marketing.openoffice.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@marketing.openoffice.org